ACIT-CIR-8, Nagpur V. M/S PRASHANT CONSTRUCTION CO., Nagpur

ITA 257/NAG/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9677 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 07-01-2016
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 06-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A R NINAWE
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI P.K. BANSAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 257/NAG./2014 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200708 ) ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE8, NAGPUR APPELLANT V/S M/S. PRASHANT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 8, TILAK PUTLA, MAHAL, NAGPUR 440 002 PAN AABFP0553A .... RESPONDENT REVENUE BY : SHRI A.R. NINAWE ASSESSEE BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING 20.06.2017 DATE OF ORDER 20.0 6.2017 O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, J.M. AFORESAID APPEAL AT THE INSTANCE OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 3 RD FEBRUARY 2014, PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER (APPEALS)II, NAGPUR, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200708 RAISING FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT TRANSPORTA TION CHARGES OF ` 13,82,850 INCLUDED PURCHASE OF MATERIAL WHICH DID NOT ATTRACT TDS PROVISION? 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE ASSESS ING OFFICER HAD SEGREGATED THE TRANSPORTATION CHARGES FROM TOTAL PA YMENTS, INCLUDING MATERIAL CHARGES AND MADE DISALLOWANCE UN DER SECTION 40(A)(IA) ON TRANSPORTATION CHARGED ONLY AMOUNTING TO ` 13,82,850 FOR WHICH TAX WAS NOT DEDUCTED AT SOURCE BY THE ASSESSEE? 2 M/S. PRASHANT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 2. WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED FOR HEARING, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BEFORE US. THEREFORE, WE PROCEED TO DISPOSE OFF THE APPEAL AFTER HEARING THE LEARNED DE PARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ON THE BASIS OF MATERIAL ON RECO RD. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTAT IVE SUBMITTED BEFORE US THAT THE TAX EFFECT PERTAINING TO THE AMOUNT DISPUTED BY THE REVENUE IS LESS THAN THE MONITARY L IMIT OF ` 10 LAKH FIXED BY THE CBDT IN CIRCULAR NO.21 OF 2015 DATED 1 0 TH DECEMBER 2015, IN RELATION TO APPEAL BEFORE THE INCOME TAX A PPELLATE TRIBUNAL. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE AFORESAID SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND ALSO FINDING THAT T HE CBDT CIRCULAR UNDER REFERENCE APPLIES RETROSPECTIVELY EVEN TO PEN DING APPEALS, WE HOLD THAT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS NOT MA INTAINABLE AND LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED AS SUCH. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 20.06.2017 SD/ - P.K. BANSAL VICE PRESIDENT SD/ - AMARJIT SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER NAGPUR, DATED: 20.06.2017 3 M/S. PRASHANT CONSTRUCTION COMPANY COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE; (2) THE REVENUE; (3) THE CIT(A); (4) THE CIT, NAGPUR CITY CONCERNED; (5) THE DR, ITAT, NAGPUR; (6) GUARD FILE. TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, NAGPUR