DCIT, Circle 34, Kolkata V. Devendra Kumar Dugar, Kolkata

ITA 1852/KOL/2009

• Counselvise Citation: 185223514 RSA 2009
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 27 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 24-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 05-11-2009
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A K PRAMANIK
• Assessee Lawyers: S M SURANA
• Section: 194C

Judgement Text

, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BEN CH A, KOLKATA () BEFORE , , , , , SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER. /AND . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , '# SHRI C.D.RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER $ $ $ $ / ITA NO . 1852/KOL/2009 %& '(/ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 (*+ / APPELLANT ) D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-34, KOLKATA - % - - VERSUS - . (-.*+/ RESPONDENT ) DEVENDRA KR.DUGAR, KOLKATA (PAN: ADEPD 7349 E) *+ / 0 '/ FOR THE APPELLANT: SHRI A.K.PRAMANIK -.*+ / 0 '/ FOR THE RESPONDENT: SHRI S.M.SURANA '1 / ORDER ( (( ( . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . ) )) ), , , , '# PER SHRI C.D.RAO, AM THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE OR DER DATED 26.08.2009 OF THE CIT(A)-XX, KOLKATA PERTAINING TO A.YR. 2006-07. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS TH AT THE DELETION OF DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE LD. A.O. U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE A O WHILE DOING THE SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT NOTICED THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE EXPENDITURE OF RS.76,94,935/- WAS DEBITED UNDER THE HEAD OF CONTRACT JOB WORK. THE AO IS OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPELLANT WAS LIABLE TO DEDUCT TAX ON THE SAID AMOUNT. AND AS THE APPELLANT AHS FAILED TO DO SO, THE AO DISALLOWED THE ENTIRE EXPENDITURE IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)(IA). 2 3.1. ON APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS HAS DELETED THE SAME BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 4.3. I HAVE PERUSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND CONSI DERED THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPELLANT. I FIND SUBSTANCE IN THE ARGUMENTS OF THE APPELLANT. IN SO FAR AS THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C(1) ARE CONCERNED, THE AM ENDMENT MADE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2007 WITH EFFECT FORM 01-06-2007 STATE S THAT SECTION 194C(1) IS APPLICABLE TO INDIVIDUAL ASSESSES ONLY FROM 01-06-2 007. AND THEREFORE, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C(1) ARE CLEARLY NOT APPLI CABLE TO THE APPELLANT DURING THE RELEVANT YEAR. FURTHER, THE PAYMENT WAS MADE TO M/S. CECO ELECTRONICS PVT LTD. NOT AS SUB-CONTRACTOR. THE AO HAS ALSO NOT MAD E OUT ANY CASE THAT THE PAYMENT WAS MADE TO A SUB-CONTRACTOR. THERE IS NO D ISPUTE THAT M/S CECO ELECTRONIC PVT LTD IS CONTRACTOR AND THAT THE PAYME NT WAS MADE BY THE APPELLANT AS AN INDIVIDUAL TO A CONTRACTOR. AND THE REFORE, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C(2) ARE ALSO NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPELLANT WAS NOT LIABLE TO DEDUCT T AX UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C AND THEREFORE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 40(A)(IA) ARE NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT. THE DISALL OWANCE MADE BY THE AO IS DIRECTED TO BE DELETED. THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE A PPELLANT ARE ALLOWED. 3.2. AGGRIEVED BY THIS THE REVENUE IS IN APPE AL BEFORE US. 4. THE LD. DR THOUGH RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AO COULD NOT CONTRADICT THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. CIT(A). ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. AR STRONGLY RELYING ON THE ORDERS OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND FILING OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS, COPY OF CONTRACT WITH HINDUSTHAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION AND COPY OF CONTRA CT AWARDED TO CECO ELECTRONIC PVT. LTD. CONTENDED THAT THE ACTION OF THE LD. CIT( A) MAY BE UPHELD. 5. HAVING HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE ASSESS EE IS AN INDIVIDUAL AND IN SO FAR AS THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C(1) IS CONCERNED THE AMENDMENT MADE BY THE FINANCE ACT, 2007 W.E.F. 01.06.2007 STATES THAT SECTION 194 C(1) IS APPLICABLE TO THE INDIVIDUAL ASSESSES ONLY FROM 01.06.2007. SINCE THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS 2006-07 WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDERS OF THE L D. CIT(A) WHICH IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF IT ACT. THEREFORE, WE CONFIR M THE SAME AND DISMISS THE REVENUES APPEAL. 3 6. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 02.06.2011. SD/- SD/- MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER . .. . ! ! ! !. .. . , ,, , '# '# '# '# , C.D.RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. ( (( (!# !# !# !#) )) ) DATE: 02.06.2011 '1 / -2 3'2'4- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI DEVENDRA KUMAR DUGAR, 18, R.N.MUKHERJEE ROAD, KOLKATA-700001. 2 THE DCIT, CIRCLE-34, KOLKATA 3. THE CIT, 4. THE CIT(A)-XX, KOLKATA 5. DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA .2 -/ TRUE COPY, '1%9/ BY ORDER, DEPUTY /ASST. REGISTRAR , ITAT, KOLKATA BENCHES R.G.(.P.S.)