DCIT PONDICHERRY CIRCLE , PUDUCHERRY V. M/S ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

ITA 1805/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6442 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 28-05-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AR V SREENIVASAN JCIT SHRI D
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !, # !$ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.1805 & 1806/CHNY/2018 & '& / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2014-15 & 2015-16 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PONDICHERRY CIRCLE, KANNAIAH BUSINESS CENTRE, NO.378-386, M.G. ROAD, PUDUCHERRY 605 001. V. M/S ENRICA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., NO.85, MATRU VAZHI SALAI (BY PASS ROAD), POONAMALLEE, CHENNAI - 600 056. PAN : AAACE 9199 F ()*/ APPELLANT) (+,)*/ RESPONDENT) )* - . / APPELLANT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT +,)* - . / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE / - 0# / DATE OF HEARING : 03.01.2019 12' - 0# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.01.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAI NST THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS), PUDUCHERRY, DATED 15.03.2018 AND PERTAIN TO ASSESSMENT YEARS 2014-15 AND 2015-16. SINCE COMMON ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IN BOTH THE APPEALS, WE HE ARD BOTH THE APPEALS TOGETHER AND DISPOSING OF THE SAME BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 2 I.T.A. NOS.1805 & 1806/CHNY/18 2. SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DEDUCT TAX WHILE MAKING PAYMENT, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFI CER DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CIT(APPEALS), ACCOR DING TO THE LD. D.R., HOWEVER, DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND THAT THE RECIPIENT HAS OFFERE D THE SAID AMOUNT AND ALSO PAID TAXES. REFERRING TO THE GROUNDS OF A PPEAL, THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT ONE OF THE CONDITIONS STIPULATE D UNDER SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT IS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TO FILE CERTIFICATE IN FORM 26A FOR THE PURPOSE OF CLAIMING DEDUCTION. SINCE T HAT WAS NOT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE CIT (APPEALS) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 3. WE HEARD SHRI D. ANAND, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE ALSO. ADMITTEDLY, THE RECIPIENT HAS OFFERED THE AM OUNT RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE AND ALSO PAID TAXES. THIS FACT I S NOT DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE. THE ONLY OBJECTION OF THE LD. D.R. IS THAT FORM 26A WAS NOT PRODUCED. SINCE THE RECIPIENT HAS PAID THE TAXES IN RESPECT OF THE AMOUNT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE, THIS TRIBUN AL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTL Y DELETED THE 3 I.T.A. NOS.1805 & 1806/CHNY/18 DISALLOWANCE. HENCE, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 4. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE REV ENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 9 TH JANUARY, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. ! ) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 9 TH JANUARY, 2019. KRI. - +056 76'0 /COPY TO: 1. )*/ APPELLANT 2. +,)*/ RESPONDENT 3. / 80 () /CIT(A), PUDUCHERRY 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, PUDUCHERRY 5. 69 +0 /DR 6. :& ; /GF.