Ramkishan Agarwal, Angul V. ITO, Angul Ward, Angul

ITA 438/CTK/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7163 (ITAT-CUTTACK)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 21-03-2017
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 22-12-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K PRADHAN
• Assessee Lawyers: D K SHETH

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK SMC BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.438 /CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012 - 13 RAMKISHAN AGARWAL, PROP. BANSAL TRADING CO, HATISALAPADA, ANGUL. VS. ITO, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL. PAN/GIR NO. AAYPA 1357 Q (APPELLANT ) .. ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI D.K.,SHETH, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI D.K.PRADHAN , DR DATE OF HEARING : 21 /03 / 2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21 /03 / 2017 O R D E R THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) - 2, BHUBANESWAR , DATED 30 TH AUGUST, 2016 , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012 - 13. 2. IN GROUND NO.1 OF THE APPEAL READS AS UNDER: FOR THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ADDITION OF RS.65,772/ - BY REVALUATION OF CLOSING STOCK IS UNCALLED FOR AND UNJUSTIFIED. 2 ITA NO.438/CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012 - 13 3. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, LD AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE DID NOT MAKE ANY SUBMISSION ON THIS GROUND OF APPEAL AND HENCE, SAME IS DISMISSED FOR WANT O F PROSECUTION. 4. GROUND NO.2 OF THE APPEAL READS AS UNDER: FOR THAT THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.3,20,324/ - U/S.40(A0(IA) UNDER HEAD PAYMENT OF INTEREST TO LOAN CREDITORS AS MADE IS ARBITRARY, UNLAWFUL AND UNJUSTIFIED IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE RESPECTIVE LOAN CREDITORS DULY FURNISH DECLARATION IN FORM 15G AND, THEREFORE, NO TAX WAS DEDUCTIBLE U/S.194A OF THE I.T.ACT. 5. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE INTEREST PAYMENT ON UNSECURED LOANS AMOUNTING TO RS.3,20,324/ - . HE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCTED TDS FROM THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST MADE. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEF ORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT SINCE THE LOAN CREDITORS HAVE FILED FORM 15G, THEREFORE, HE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TDS FROM THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST MADE TO THEM. SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT FORM 15G WAS RECEIVED BY IT B EFORE PAYMENT OF INTEREST TO THE LOAN CREDITORS AND THE SAID FORMS WERE FILED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ON OR BEFORE 7 TH DAY OF NEXT MONTH, THE ASSESSING OFFICER BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT DISALLOWED DEDUCTION FO R RS.3,20,324/ - . 6. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 7. BEFORE ME, THE ONLY ARGUMENT OF LD AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT SINCE FORM S 15G WERE FILED BY THE LOAN CREDITORS, THE 3 ITA NO.438/CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012 - 13 ASSESSEE WAS NOT REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TDS FROM THE PAYMENT OF INTEREST MADE TO THE LOAN CREDITORS. HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT COPIES OF FORM 15G WERE FILED WITH THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX WITHIN THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF THE SAME. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO TH E FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION AND ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUE AFRESH. 8. LD DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE HAD NO OBJECTION TO THE ABOVE SUBMISSION OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE. 9. I FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD PLAUSIBLE REASON FOR NOT DEDUCTING TDS ON INTEREST PAYMENT TO THE LOAN CREDITORS AS THEY HAVE FILED FORM S 15G. IT IS ALSO THE CONTENTION OF LD A.R. OF THE ASSESSEE THAT FORM S 15G WERE FILED BEFORE THE CIT WITHIN 7 TH DAY OF NEXT MONTH. I ALSO FIND THAT THE ADDITION OF INTEREST EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE GROUND TH A T EVIDENCE FOR RECEIVING FORM S 15G AND FILING OF THE SAME BEFORE THE CIT WAS NOT PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE. LD AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE HAS MADE A SUBMISSION AT BAR THAT THE REL EVANT FORMS 15G AND EVIDENCE OF FILING THE SAME WITH THE CIT ARE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND HAS PRAYED FOR ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR PRODUCING THE SAME BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. I N MY CONSIDERED OPINION, NO HARM WILL BE CAUSED TO THE REVENUE IF ON E MORE OPPORTUNITY IS ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF RENDERING SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE, I SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF LOWER AUTHORITIES AND REMAND THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR ADJUDICATING THE SA ME AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERING COPIES OF FORM 15G 4 ITA NO.438/CTK/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR :2012 - 13 RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE LOAN CREDITORS AND EVIDENCE OF FILING THE SAME BEFORE THE CIT(A)WITHIN PRESCRIBED TIME BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FILE FORM S 15G BEFORE THE ASSESSING O FFICER AND EVIDENCE OF FILING THE SAME BEFORE THE CIT WITHIN DUE DATE AS AND WHEN CALLED UPON TO DO SO. WITH THESE DIRECTIONS, THE MATTER IS REMANDED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRO NOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 /03 /2017 IN THE PRESENCE OF PARTIES. SD/ - ( N.S SAINI) A CCOUNTANT MEMBER CUTTACK; DATED 21 /03 /2017 B.K.PARIDA, SPS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, CUTTACK 1. THE APPELLANT : RAMKISHAN AGARWAL, PROP. BANSAL TRADING CO, HATISALAPADA, ANGUL. 2. THE RESPONDENT. ITO, ANGUL WARD, ANGUL. 3. THE CIT(A) - 2, BHUBANESWAR. 4. PR.CIT - 2, BHUBANESWAR. 5. DR, ITAT, CUTTACK 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//