DURAIRAJ RANJITH BABU, CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW-10(5), CHENNAI

ITA 3319/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8762 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , , [BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] ./I.T.A. NO. 3319/CHNY/2018 ! / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-2016. DURAIRAJ RANJITH BABU, C-1, 5327, BARNA VILLA, BARNABY ROAD, KILPAUK, CHENNAI 600 010. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 10(5) CHENNAI. [PAN AFNPR 8114A] ( / APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) '# $ % / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. K. BALASUBRAMANIAN, ADV &' '# $ % /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT ( ) $ * /DATE OF HEARING : 23-10-2019 +,! $ * /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20-11-2019 / O R D E R PER INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-1 2, CHENNAI (CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 17.09.2018 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR (AY) 2015-2016. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: ITA NO. 3319/2018 :- 2 -: THE APPELLANT IS AN INDIVIDUAL ENGAGED IN THE BUSIN ESS OF SUPPLY OF LABOUR, EQUIPMENT AND READYMIX CONCRETE. THE RE TURN OF INCOME FOR THE AY 2015-16 WAS FILED ON 24.03.2016 DISCLOSING T OTAL INCOME OF RS.13,88,190/-. AGAINST THE SAID RETURN OF INCOME, THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORP ORATE WARD 10(5) CHENNAI VIDE ORDER DATED 19.12.2017 PASSED U/S. 143 (3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT) AT TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 43,31,164/-. WHILE DOING SO, THE ASSESSING OFFI CER MADE ADDITION OF G18,65,462/- U/S.40(A) (IA) OF THE ACT, BY 30% OF M ACHINERY HIRE CHARGES AND LABOUR CONTRACT, AND INTEREST ON HDB F INANCIAL SERVICES ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO DEDUCT T DS ON THE SAID PAYMENTS. 3. BEING AGGRIEVED, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BEFORE TH E LD. CIT(A) WHO VIDE IMPUGNED ORDER DISMISSED THE APPEAL . 4. BEING AGGRIEVED, THE APPELLANT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOULD NOT HAVE MADE DISALLOWANCE U/S.40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT PAYEES HAD ALREADY OFFERED TO TAX THE INCOM E IN THEIR HANDS AND PAID TAXES THEREON. AS REGARDS TO THE ADDITION OF DEPRECIATION, IT IS CONTENDED THAT ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FILE DETAILS IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT BOOKS WERE LOST IN THE FLOODS CAUSED IN THE YE AR 2015. ITA NO. 3319/2018 :- 3 -: 5. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. SR. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESE NTATIVE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES. 6. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATE RIAL ON RECORD. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPE AL RELATES TO DISALLOWANCE U/S.40(A) (IA) OF THE ACT. THE CONTEN TION OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT SECOND PROVISO TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT SHOULD BE APPLIED TO THE PRESENT CASE DESERVES MERIT. THEREFORE WE R EMIT THIS MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIF Y ALL MATERIALS AND EVIDENCE PLACED ON RECORD AFTER AFFORDING DUE OPPO RTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE APPELLANT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. HENCE, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ( ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER - ) / CHENNAI . / DATED:20 TH NOVEMBER, 2019 KV $ &*01 21!* / COPY TO: 1 . '# / APPELLANT 3. ( 3* () / CIT(A) 5. 16 &*7 / DR 2. &' '# / RESPONDENT 4. ( 3* / CIT 6. 8 9) / GF