Transstory-JSC-EC-UES-JV, Hyderabad V. DCIT, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad

ITA 343/Hyd/2023

AI Insights

The case involves Transstroy-JSC-EC-UES-JV, the appellant, contesting an order from the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, regarding the assessment year 2018-19. The primary issue was the denial of a claim related to TDS on hire charges paid directly by the Government to M/s. SHEI Equipments Finance Limited. The assessee argued that they had not been given sufficient opportunity to present their case and evidence before the CIT(A). The Income Tax Officer had denied the claim due to the absence of concrete evidence of TDS made by or on behalf of the assessee. The Tribunal, considering the principles of faceless appeals and the need for substantial justice, decided to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a thorough examination with an opportunity for the assessee to present additional evidence.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 133191 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-07-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-07-2023
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 02-07-2023
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Corroborative evidences; TDS

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI RAMA KANTA PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI K.NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अपी.सं / ITA No. 343/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Transstroy-JSC-EC-UES-JV, Hyderabad [PAN No. AADAT3921H] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती‍द्वधरध / Assessee by: Shri T.Chaitanya Kumar, AR रधजस्‍व‍द्वधरध / Revenue by: Ms. L. Sunitha Rao, CIT-DR स ु िवधई‍की‍तधरीख/Date of hearing: 27/07/2023 घोर्णध की‍तधरीख/Pronouncement on: 31/07/2023 आदेश / ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M: Aggrieved by the order dated 02/05/2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”), in the case of Transstroy-JSC EC UES-JV (“the assessee”) for the assessment year 2018-19, assessee preferred this appeal. ITA No. 343/Hyd/2023 Page 2 of 4 2. At the outset, learned AR submitted that sufficient opportunity is not given before the learned CIT(A) recording that though assessee claimed that the Government has made payments on account of hire charges, directly to M/s. SHEI Equipments Finance Limited and the respective TDS has also made by book adjustment by the Government, assessee did not produce any concrete evidence of TDS made by or on behalf of the assessee and neither order nor certificate from any Government agency in support of the assessee’s claim, and, therefore, the learned Assessing Officer denied the claim of the assessee. He submits that it was also observed by the learned CIT(A) that the assessee has also failed to furnish any supporting evidences in support of his claim. 3. Learned DR submits that since the assessee did not produce relevant evidence, the authorities are justified in making/sustaining the disallowance. He further submitted that this is a question of fact and no amount of evidence can be permitted/appreciated at the second appellate stage and, therefore, if for any reason, the Bench feels it necessary, the issue may be remanded to the file of learned CIT(A). 4. We have gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. We considered the submissions in the perspective of faceless appeals procedure and the problems pleaded by the assessee. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that it would be in the interest of justice to afford an opportunity to the assessee to produce all the evidences available to justify its claim. We are of the opinion that the highest that would happen by affording an opportunity to the assessee to prosecute its appeal before the learned CIT(A) by submitting the evidences, is that a cause could be decided on merits. When the technicalities are pitted against the delivery of substantial justice, the former must give way to the latter. 5. With this view of the matter, while setting aside the impugned order and restoring the appeal to the file of the learned CIT(A), we direct ITA No. 343/Hyd/2023 Page 3 of 4 the assessee to co-operate with the first appellate authority in getting the matters disposed of on merits, without seeking any adjournments and the learned CIT(A) to take a fresh look at the matter, after affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee of being heard. We order accordingly. 6. In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this the 31 st day of July, 2023 Sd/- Sd/- (RAMA KANTA PANDA) (K. NARASIMHA CHARY) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 31/07/2023 TNMM ITA No. 343/Hyd/2023 Page 4 of 4 Copy forwarded to: 1. Transstroy -JSC-EC-UES-JV, 8-3-833/104, Main Road, Kamalapuri Colony, Hyderabad. 2. Income Tax Officer, Circle-6(1), Hyderabad. 3. Pr.CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Hyderabad. 5. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, HYDERABAD