Jiwanram Sheoduttrai Industries Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata V. I.T.O., Ward-2(1)(TDS), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 377/KOL/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Jiwanram Sheoduttrai Industries Pvt. Ltd, the appellant, contesting an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre (CIT(A)) which upheld a demand raised by the Assessing Officer for non-deduction of TDS under section 201(1) of the Income Tax Act. The demand included a tax of Rs.82,990 and interest of Rs.78,008 under section 201(1A). The appellant argued that the issue was not a case of non-deduction but rather short deduction of TDS on professional fees paid, and that the payees had included these amounts in their income tax returns and paid the due taxes. Additionally, it was contended that TDS was not deducted on payments to skilled laborers as it was a matter of prevailing trade practice. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's request for a re-examination of these factual aspects by the Assessing Officer.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 128193 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-11-2022
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2022
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS; Set aside
• Section: 201(1); 250

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, कोलकाता पीठ ‘ए’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH KOLKATA Įी संजय गग[, ÛयाǓयक सदèय एवं Įी मनीष बोरड, लेखा सदèय के सम¢ Before Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member and Dr. Manish Borad, Accountant Member I.T.A No.377/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2012-13 Jiwanram Sheoduttrai Industries Pvt. Ltd..............................................Appellant 30D, Jawaharlal Nehru Road, Park Street, Kolkata-700016. [PAN:AAACJ7420L] vs. ITO, Ward-2(1) (TDS), Kolkata ............................................................Respondent Appearances by: Shri Saumen Dutta, AR, appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT-DR, appeared on behalf of the Respondent. Date of concluding the hearing : November 29, 2022 Date of pronouncing the order : January 16, 2023 आदेश / ORDER संजय गग[, ÛयाǓयक सदèय ɮवारा / Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order dated 29.04.2022 of the National Faceless Appeal Centre [hereinafter referred to as the ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The assessee in this appeal has agitated the action of the CIT(A) in upholding the demand raised by the Assessing Officer on account of non-deduction of TDS u/s 201(1) of the Act and thereby, holding the assessee as assessee in default and thereby, raising the tax demand of Rs.82,990/- and interest of Rs.78,008/- u/s 201(1A) of the Act. I.T.A No.377/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2012-13 Jiwanram Sheoduttrai Industries Pvt. Ltd 2 3. At the outset the ld. counsel for the assessee, in this respect, has submitted that so far as non-deduction on account of payment of professional fees of Rs.2,88,110/- to Rajesh Kumar Shah & Associates was concerned, it was not a case of non-deduction of TDS but short deduction of TDS. He has further contended that even otherwise the payee had included the said amount in his income tax return and that as per Proviso to section 201, if the payee has furnished his return of income and taken into account the amount of payment made to him without deduction of TDS and has paid the due taxes thereupon and declaration is furnished in this respect then the payer is not liable to be declared as ‘assessee in default’. The ld. counsel has further submitted that so far as the issue relating to non-deduction of TDS paid to Shri Asit Mistri and Shri Umesh Sharma was concerned, both were skilled labourer and the payment was made on account of wages and not as contractors and the assessee was justified in non-deducting of TDS on the wages of the labourer as a matter of prevailing trade practice. The ld. counsel has requested that the matter may be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for examination of the aforesaid factual aspect and pass a fresh assessment order on this issue. 4. The ld. DR has not objected to the same. 5. In view of the above, the impugned order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer to examine the aforesaid contentions of the assessee and if the contentions of the assessee are found correct, the accordingly grant relief to the assessee. The Assessing Officer will give proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case, thereafter to decide this limited issue afresh. I.T.A No.377/Kol/2022 Assessment year: 2012-13 Jiwanram Sheoduttrai Industries Pvt. Ltd 3 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Kolkata, the 16 th January, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- [डॉÈटर मनीष बोरड /Dr. Manish Borad] [संजय गग[ /Sanjay Garg] लेखा सदèय /Accountant Member ÛयाǓयक सदèय /Judicial Member Dated: 16.01.2023. RS Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. Jiwanram Sheoduttrai Industries Pvt. Ltd 2. ITO, Ward-2(1) (TDS), Kolkata 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //True copy// By order Assistant Registrar, Kolkata Benches