M/s. Amit Fashion, Surat V. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1), Surat

ITA 2888/AHD/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9277 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 02-02-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RICHA RASTOGI
• Keywords: Additional evidence
• Section: 143(3); 194C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD SMC/I BENCH AHMEDABAD BEFORE, SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.2888/AHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR:2010-11) M/S. AMIT FASHION 527-528, ADARSH MARKET-I, RING ROAD, SURAT-395002 APPELLANT VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(1), SURAT RES PONDENT PAN: AAJFA2572N /BY ASSESSEE : NONE /BY REVENUE : MS. RICHA RASTOGI, SR. D.R. /DATE OF HEARING : 02.02.2017 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 08.02.2017 ORDER PER S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ARISES AGAINST CIT(A)-I, SURATS ORDER DATED 11.09.2013, IN APPEAL NO. CAS-I/542/2012-13, AFFIRMING ASSESSING OFFICERS ACTION INVOKING SECTI ON 40(A)(IA) DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,36,220/- FOR NON DEDUCTION OF TDS ON PAYMEN TS MADE FOR CUTTING, PACKING AND TRANSPORT CONTRACTORS, IN PROCEEDINGS U NDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961; IN SHORT THE ACT. ITA NO. 2888/AHD/2013 (M/S. AMIT FASHION VS. ITO) A.Y. 2010-11 - 2 - 2. CASE CALLED TWICE. NONE APPEARS AT ASSESSEES B EHEST. IT IS ACCORDINGLY PROCEEDED EX PARTE. WE HAVE HEARD MS. RASTOGI REPR ESENTING REVENUE STRONGLY SUPPORTING BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ACT ION INVOKING THE IMPUGNED SECTION 40(A)(IA) DISALLOWANCE FOR NON DEDUCTION OF TDS ON THE ABOVE STATED CUTTING, PACKAGING AND TRANSPORT CONTRACT PAYMENTS. 3. WE NOW ADVERT TO THE RELEVANT FACTS. THERE APPE ARS TO BE HARDLY ANY DISPUTE THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCTED TDS ON T HE ABOVE STATED PAYMENTS. THE SAME FOUND THE PRECISE REASON ON ASSESSING OFFI CERS PART TO INVOKE THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPE AL. IT FILED ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE BEFORE THE CIT(A) IN THE COURSE OF LOWER A PPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THAT ALL OF ITS PAYMENTS IN QUESTION NEITHER EXCEEDED TH E THRESHOLD LIMIT OF RS.20,000/- NOR THE AGGREGATE THEREOF EXCEEDED THE STATUTORY LIMIT OF RS.50,000/- SO AS TO BE SUBJECTED TO TDS DEDUCTION. LD. CIT(A) HAS DECLINED TO ADMIT THE SAME AFTER OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER HAD PROVIDED IT SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. HE THEREAFTER U PHOLDS THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE. 4. WE HAVE GIVEN OUR THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO RE VENUES ARGUMENTS. CASE FILE PERUSED. THERE CAN HARDLY BE ANY DISPUTE THAT SECTION 194(5) ENVISAGED THRESHOLD LIMIT OF RS.20,000/- FOLLOWED B Y AGGREGATE THEREOF ALL PAYMENTS INSTANCES TO THE VERY CONTRACTOR PAYEES TO BE EXCEEDING RS. 50,000/-. MS. RASTOGI DOES NOT DISPUTE THIS FACTUAL POSITION. WE FIND IN THIS BACKDROP THAT ASSESSEES PAPER BOOK AT PAGE NO.1 MAKES IT CL EAR THAT NEITHER ITS PAYMENT INSTANCE CROSSED THE FORMER THRESHOLD LIMIT OF RS.2 0,000/- NOR THE AGGREGATE STIPULATION OF RS.50,000/- IN THE IMPUGNED ASSESSME NT YEAR. WE OBSERVE IN THESE PECULIAR FACTS THAT BOTH THE LOWER AUTHORITIE S HAVE ERRED IN INVOKING THE IMPUGNED DISALLOWANCE AS THE ASSESSEES PAYMENTS DO NOT COME WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE CHARGING SECTION 194C ITSELF. WE AC CORDINGLY CONCLUDE THAT ITA NO. 2888/AHD/2013 (M/S. AMIT FASHION VS. ITO) A.Y. 2010-11 - 3 - THE LD. CTI(A) HAS ERRED IN DECLINING ASSESSEES AD DITIONAL EVIDENCE WHICH WAS VERY MUCH RELEVANT FOR APPROPRIATE ADJUDICATION OF THE MATTER SINCE GOING TO ROOT OF THE CASE. WE THUS DELETE THE IMPUGNED S ECTION 40(A)(IA) DISALLOWANCE OF RS.1,36,220/-. 5. THE ASSESSEE SUCCEEDS IN ITS INSTANT APPEAL. [PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS THE 8 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017.] SD/- SD/- ( AMARJIT SINGH ) (S. S. GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD: DATED 08/02/2017 TRUE COPY S.K.SINHA / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDED TO:- / REVENUE 2 / ASSESSEE ! / CONCERNED CIT 4 !- / CIT (A) ( )*+ ,--. . /0 / DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1 +23 / GUARD FILE. BY ORDER / . // . /0