Jyoti Prasad Rout, Dhenkanal V. ITO, Ward-1, Dhenkanal

ITA 431/CTK/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3864 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 12-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 13-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K PRADHAN

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.431 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 2011 JYOTI PRASAD ROUT,AT/PO: KHARAG PRASAD, VIA: MERAMUNDALI, DHENKANAL. VS. ITO, DHENKANAL, WARD, DHENKANAL. PAN/GIR NO. AFQPR 109 A (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN , DR DATE OF HEARING : 12 /04 / 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12 /04 / 2017 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 2, BHUBANESWAR , DATED 1.9.2016 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010 - 2011 . 2. THE SOLE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS THAT THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.3,12,949/ - MADE U/S. 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. 3. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 21.3.2017 WHEN THE LD AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE SOUGHT ADJOURNMENT AND THE CASE WAS ADJOURNED TO TODAY I.E. 12.4.2017 AND THE PARTIES WERE INFORMED IN THE OPE N COURT ABOUT THE NEXT DATE OF HEARING. TODAY WHEN THE CASE WAS CALLED 2 ITA NO.431/CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010 - 2011 FOR HEARING, NEITHER ANYONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT WAS FILED. THEREFORE, THE APPEAL HEARD EXPARTE QUA - THE ASSESSEE AND DISPOSED OFF CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSION OF LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 4. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENT TO THE FOLLOWING PERSONS FOR SUPPLY OF LABOUR: SL.NO. NAME OF THE LABO UR SUPPLIERS DATE OF PAYMENT AMOUNT PAID 1. R.P.ROUT 15.5.2009 1,05,000 2. AJAY MOHAPATRA 17.2.2010 1,00,000 3. SUNIL 9.3.2010 66,000 4. RANJAN SAHU 9.3.210 71,000 5. R V. KELKA 9.3.2010 60,000 6. RUDRALAWR CHITA 10.3.2010 76,949/ - TOTAL: RS.4,78,949/ - 5. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCTED TDS U/S.194C OF THE ACT AND, THEREFORE, BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT, HE DISALLOWED DEDUCTION FOR RS.4,78,949/ - AND ADDED THE SAME T O THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) RESTRICTED THE DISALLOWANCE TO RS.3,12,949/ - BEING PAYMENT MADE TO FOUR LABOUR SARDARS WITHOUT DEDUCTION OF TAX U/S.194C OF THE ACT AS UNDER: SL.NO. NAME OF THE LABOUR SUPPLIERS DATE OF PAYMENT AMOUNT PAID 1. R.P.ROUT 15.5.2009 1,05,000 2. R V. KELKA 9.3.2010 60,000 3 RUDRALAWR CHITA 10.3.2010 76,949/ - 4. RANJAN SAHU 9.3.2010 71,000/ - TOTAL: RS.3,12,949/ - 3 ITA NO.431/CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010 - 2011 7. LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). 8. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HAS STATED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENTS TO THE LABOUR SARDARS AS UNDER: THE FOLLOWING PERSONS FOR SUPPLY OF LABOUR: SL.NO. NAME OF THE LABOUR SUPPLIERS DATE OF PAYMENT AMOUNT PAID 1. R.P.ROUT 15.5.2009 1,05,000 2. AJAY MOHAPATRA 17.2.2010 1,00,000 3. SUNIL 9.3.2010 66,000 4. RANJAN SAHU 9.3.210 71,000 5. R V. KELKA 9.3.2010 60,000 6. RUDRALAWR CHITA 10.3.2010 76,949/ - TOTAL: RS.4,78,949/ - 9. PERUSAL OF ABOVE TABLE SHOWS THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT FOR LABOUR CHARGES WAS PAID BEFORE THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 31.3.2010. THUS, NO AMOUNT WAS OUTSTANDING AND PAYABLE AS ON 31.3.2010. THEREFOR E, FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VICTOR SHIPPING SERVICES (P) LTD., (2013) 357 ITR 642(ALL), WHEREIN, IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT FOR DISALLOWING EXPENSES FROM BUSINESS AND PROFESSION ON THE GROUND THAT TAX HAS NOT BEEN DEDUCTED AT SOURCE, THE AMOUN T SHOULD BE PAYABLE AND NOT IT HAS BEEN P AID BY THE END OF THE YEAR, THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VICTOR SHIPPING SERVI C ES (P) LTD (SUPRA), NO DISALLOWANCE U/S.40(A)(IA) WAS WARRANTED IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. V ICTOR 4 ITA NO.431/CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2010 - 2011 SHIPPING SERVICES (P) LTD(SUPRA), I DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,12,949 / - SUSTAINED BY THE CIT(A) U/S.40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. THIS G ROUND IS ALLOWED. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 /04 /2017 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - ( N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 12 /04 /2017 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : JYOTI PRASAD ROUT,AT/PO: KHARAG PRASAD, VIA: MERAMUNDALI, DHENKANAL. 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, DHENKANAL, WARD, DHENKANAL. 3. THE CIT(A) - 2, BHUBANESWAR. 4. PR.CIT - 2, BHUBANESWAR. 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//