M/s. Binori Infracon, Ahmedabad V. The Dy.CIT, Circle-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 419/AHD/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1636 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-06-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-06-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 06-03-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NITIN VISHNU KULKARNI
• Section: 143(3); 142(1); 40(a)(ia); 194C; 143(1); 143(2)

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरणआयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद 瀈यायपीठ अहमदाबाद 瀈यायपीठअहमदाबाद 瀈यायपीठ अहमदाबाद 瀈यायपीठ “B”, अहमदाबाद अहमदाबादअहमदाबाद अहमदाबाद । ।। । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD ] ] BEFORE MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTNAT MEMBER ITA No.419/Ahd/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 M/s.Binori Infracon Old S.No.319/2, Block No.440 Binori Gracia Opp. Sobo Centre, South Bopal Ahmedabad – 380 058 (Gujarat) Vs The Dy.CIT Circle-3(2)(1) Ahmedabad PAN: AAOFB 4823 E / (Appellant) / (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Ketan Shah, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Nitin Vishnu Kulkarni, Sr.DR /Date of Hear ing : 1 2/0 6/202 4 /Da te of Prono u nce me nt: 14/ 06/20 24 आदेश/O R D E R PER SHRI MAKARAND V. MAHADEOKAR, AM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Office of Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal, Addl/JCIT(Appeals)–2 Pune [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld.Addl.CIT(A)”], dated 02-02-2024, in relation to the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer [hereinafter referred to as “ the AO”] under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") for the Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. ITA No.419/Ahd/2024 M/s.Binori Infracon vs. DCIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 2 Facts of the Case: 2. The assessee-firm filed its return of income for the AY 2017-18 on 27-07- 2017 declaring a total income of Rs. 68,76,546/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny under the CASS, and a notice under section 143(2) of the Act was issued on 10-08-2018, which was duly served on the assessee. Subsequently, the case was transferred to another Assessing Officer (AO), who issued notices under section 142(1) of the Act on various dates. The assessee furnished written submissions and requisite details from time to time, which were examined by the AO. 2.1. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was observed that the assessee paid transportation charges amounting to Rs. 38,77,542/- on which tax was not deducted at source as required under section 194C of the Act. The assessee explained that the tax was not deducted on certain payments as they did not exceed Rs.30,000/- per transaction or on the basis of declarations provided by the transporters. However, the assessee did not initially furnish copies of such declarations. The AO, upon examination, found that some declarations were dated after the relevant financial year. Specifically, declarations as per following details: Name of the Transporter(s) Amount Paid in Rs. Date of Declaration Smit Transport 25,30,500/- 01-06-2017 Yogeshwar Transport 9,78,317/- 14-05-2017 Shri Ram Enterprises 1,36,000/- 20-08-2017 ITA No.419/Ahd/2024 M/s.Binori Infracon vs. DCIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 3 2.2. The AO concluded that these declarations were not available at the time of payment or crediting the amount, hence, the assessee had failed to comply with the provisions of section 194C of the Act. Consequently, at 30% of the payments amounting to Rs.36,44,817/- were disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, resulting in an addition of Rs.10,93,445/- to the assessee's income. 3. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.Addl.CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee failed to respond properly to five notices issued by the Ld.Addl.CIT(A). The assessee did not provide adequate explanations or supporting documents within the stipulated time frame. Therefore, the assessee is in appeal before us with following ground: 4. The Learned Lower Authorities has erred in making/confirming the addition made as per the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for the amount of Rs.10,93,445/-. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law, the addition made is required to be deleted. On the grounds of appeal: 5. The assessee contended that the necessary declarations from the transporters have now been obtained and are available for verification. It was argued that these declarations substantiate the claim that tax was not deductible under section 194C of the Act as the transporters met the criteria laid out in the section. ITA No.419/Ahd/2024 M/s.Binori Infracon vs. DCIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 4 6. The Assessee’s Ld.Representative (AR) requested that the matter be referred to the Ld.Addl.CIT(A) for reconsideration in light of the new evidence. The Ld.Departmental Representative did not object to the request of Ld.AR of the assessee. 7. We have heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. Considering that the assessee has now furnished the necessary declarations from the transporters, which were not previously available during the assessment or appellate proceedings, we find it appropriate to refer the matter back to the file of Ld.Addl.CIT(A). Therefore, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld.Addl.CIT(A) and restore the matter to his file with a direction to re- adjudicate the issue afresh, after considering the declarations provided by the assessee. The Ld.Addl.CIT(A) shall give the assessee a proper opportunity to present their case and provide any additional evidence as required. The assessee is also directed to co-operate with the Ld.Addl.CIT(A) and furnish all necessary documents promptly. Hence, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 14 th June, 2024 at Ahmedabad. Sd/- Sd/- (SUCHITRA KAMBLE) JUDICIAL MEMBER (MAKARAND V.MAHADEOKAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad, Dated 14/06/2024 . ी. य , . . ./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS ITA No.419/Ahd/2024 M/s.Binori Infracon vs. DCIT Asst. Year : 2017-18 5 ! "# /Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. "!ी $% / The Appellant 2. &य$% / The Respondent. 3. '(')* य य + / Concerned CIT 4. य य + )"!ी (/ The CIT(A)-concerned (Addl/JCIT(A)-2 Pune). 5. . /ीय )* , य "!ी य ")* , ज /DR,ITAT, Ahmedabad. 6. / 12 3 /Guard file. / BY ORDER, &य ! //True Copy// ह य !'जी (Asstt. Registrar) य "!ी य ")* , ITAT, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation (word processed by Hon’ble AM in his laptop) : 12.6.2024 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member. : 13.6.2024 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S : 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement. : 5. Date on which fair order placed before Other Member : 6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S. : 14.6.24 7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk. : 14.6.24 8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk. : 9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order. : 10. Date of Despatch of the Order :