Sh. Virender Thakur, Mandi V. DCIT, Mandi

ITA 370/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 60901 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-07-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 29-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L. KARWA, VP AND SHRI T.R. SOOD, AM ITA NO. 370/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 SHRI VIRENDER THAKUR V D.C.I.T. CIRCLE, MANDI (H P) CONTRACTOR VILLAGE JHIRI P.O. NAGWAIN DISTT. MANDI ABTPT 2438 D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI N.K. SAINI DATE OF HEARING: 2.07.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 3.07.2012 ORDER PER T.R. SOOD, A.M IN THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE ADJOURNM ENT APPLICATION BUT THE SAME WAS REJECTED BECAUSE PERUSAL OF THE RECORD SHO WS THAT THE ISSUES ARE COVERED BY THE DECISION OF SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRI BUNAL VISHAKHAPATNAM IN CASE OF ACIT V. MERILYN SHIPPING & TRANSPORT, 140 T TJ 1 (SB) (VISHAKHAPATNAM), THEREFORE, WE PROCEED TO HEAR TH E APPEAL ON EX-PARTE. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEA L BUT THE ONLY DISPUTE IS REGARDING DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 20,57,150/- U/S 40 (A)(IA) OF THE ACT FOR NON- DEDUCTION OF TAX. 3. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE WAS HEARD. 4. AFTER HEARING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE AND THE MATERIAL ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED EXPENDITU RE ON ACCOUNT OF CONTRACT WORK AGAINST THE THREE PARTIES FROM WHOM TDS WAS NO T DEDUCTED. THE MAIN PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ALLOTTED TAN AND IN ANY CASE THE PAYEES HAVE ALREADY REFLECTED THE AMOUNT I N THEIR RETURNS. HOWEVER, 2 THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT ACCEPT THE SUBMISSION S AND MAIN ADDITION FOR NON- DEDUCTION OF TAX BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. 5. ON APPEAL THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WA S CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 6. WE FIND THAT RECENTLY SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TRIBU NAL VISHAKHAPATNAM IN CASE OF ACIT V. MERILYN SHIPPING & TRANSPORT, 140 T TJ 1 (SB) (VISHAKHAPATNAM) HAS HELD THAT PROVISIONS OF SECTIO N 40(A)(IA) WOULD BE APPLICABLE ONLY IF THE AMOUNTS REMAIN PAYABLE. IT IS NOT CLEAR FROM THE RECORDS WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY MADE THE PAYMENTS OR NOT. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND REMIT THE MATTER BACK TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTI ON TO DECIDE THE SAME AFRESH IN THE LIGHT OF DECISION OF SPECIAL BENCH OF THE TR IBUNAL VISHAKHAPATNAM IN CASE OF ACIT V. MERILYN SHIPPING & TRANSPORT (SUPRA). N EEDLESS TO SAY THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 3.07.2012 SD/- SD/- (H.L. KARWA) (T.R. SOOD) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 3.07.2012 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/ THE DR 3