M/s Prakash parcel Services Limited , Bangalore V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

ITA 460/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4627 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 26 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 19-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B R RAMESH
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY DAVE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH A BEFORE S HRI N.V. VASUDEVAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P BOAZ , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T . A. NO. 460 /BANG/20 18 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 14 - 15 ) M/S. PRAKASH PARCEL SERVICES LIMITED, NO.18/3, 2 ND F LOOR, 1 ST MAIN ROAD, SAMPANGIRAM NAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 027 . . APPELLANT. VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 5(1)(2), BANGALORE. .. RESPONDE NT. APPELLANT BY : SHRI SANJAY DAVE, C A R E SPONDENT BY : SHRI B.R. RAMESH, JCIT (D.R) DATE OF H EARING : 13.06.2018. DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 15 .06 .201 8 . O R D E R PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, A .M . : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 5 , BANGALORE DT.22.12.2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 14 - 15. 2. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FAC TS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER : - 2 IT A NO. 460 /BANG/201 8 2.1 THE ASSESSEE, A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF TRANSPORTATION AND LOGISTICS, FILED ITS RETURN FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 15 ON 29.11.2014 DECLARING INCOME OF RS.3,28,94,540. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THE ASSESSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') VIDE ORDER DT.21.11.2016 WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE'S INCOME WAS DETERMINED AT RS.4,02,99,542 IN VIEW OF VARIOUS ADDITIONS / DISALLOWANCES. ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) DISPOSED THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL VIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DT.22.12.2017 ALLOWING THE ASSESSEE PARTIAL RELIEF. 3.1 AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF CIT (APPEALS) 5, BANGALORE DT.22.12.2017 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 15, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPE AL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL, WHEREIN IT HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : - 3 IT A NO. 460 /BANG/201 8 3.2 THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS HEARD IN SUPPORT OF THE GROUNDS RAISED (SUPRA). ACCORDING TO THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSIN G OFFICER DID NOT AFFORD THE ASSESSEE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED TO BE GIVEN UNDER THE FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) IGNORED THE SUBMISSIONS, CERTIFICATES AND DETAILS PUT FORTH BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF THE SECOND PROVISO TO SEC. 40(A)(IA) R.W.S. 201(1)OF THE ACT, WHICH ARE PLACED BEFORE US AT PAGES 1 TO 20 OF PAPER BOOK FILED VIDE LETTER DT.8.6.2018. IT IS CONTENDED THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWE D THE INTEREST PAYMENTS MADE WITHOUT TDS THEREON IN VIEW OF THE SECOND PROVISO TO SEC.40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT WHICH PROVIDES THAT WHERE AN ASSESSEE FAILS TO DEDUCT THE WHOLE OR PART OF ANY TAX IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER XVII - B ON ANY SUCH SU M BUT IS NOT DEEMED TO BE AN ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT UNDER THE FIRST PROVISO OF SEC. 201(1) OF THE ACT, THEN, FOR THE PURPOSES OF THE SUB - CLAUSE (1), IT SHALL BE DEEMED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEDUCTED AND PAID THE TAX ON SUCH SUM ON THE DATE OF FURNISHING OF RE TURN BY THE RESIDENT PAYEE REFERRED TO IN THE SAID PROVISO. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE 4 IT A NO. 460 /BANG/201 8 THAT THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THIS ISSUE BE SET ASIDE AND THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL BE ALLOWED. RELIANC E WAS ALSO PLACED ON WRITTEN SUBMISSION S PLACED VIDE LETTER DT.29.5.2018. 3.3 PER CONTRA, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FOR REVENUE SUPPORTED THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE ALLOWED MERELY BASED ON THE ASSESSEE'S AVERMENTS AND REQUIRES VERIFICATION AND THEREFORE MATTER / ISSUE MAY BE SET ASIDE TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER S FILE FOR EXAMINATION / VERIFICATION. 3.4 .1 WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. FROM AN APPRAISAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, IT IS SEEN THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT AN EXPENDITURE AMOUNT OF RS.59,49,951 DEBITED TO THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT WAS INADMISSIBLE UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT AS TDS WAS NOT MADE THEREON AND THEREFORE DISALLOWED THE SAME. ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED CIT (APPEALS) UPHELD THE ASSESSING OFFICER S ACTION AND DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE'S PLEA. 3.4.2 BEFORE US, THE ASSESSEE FILED WRITTE N SUBMISSIONS DT.28.5.2018 CONTENDING THAT NO DISALLOWANCE IS CALLED FOR SINCE THE REQUIREMENT 5 IT A NO. 460 /BANG/201 8 PRESCRIBED UNDER THE SECOND PROVISO TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT IS COMPLIED WITH. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION IS EXTRACTED HEREUNDER : - 6 IT A NO. 460 /BANG/201 8 3.4.3 AFTER CAREFUL PERUSAL AND CONSIDERATION OF THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, THE ASSESSEE'S SUBMISSIONS (SUPRA) AND THE ARGUMENTS PUT FORTH ON BOTH SIDES, IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS SOME MERIT IN THE ASSESSEE'S CONTENTIONS THAT THE LEA RNED CIT (APPEALS) HAD BRUSHED ASIDE AND IGNORED THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS PUT FORTH BY THE ASSESSEE. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE AND EQUITY WOULD BE SERVED BY SETTING ASIDE THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THIS ISSUE AND ACCORDINGLY RESTORE THIS ISSUE BEFORE US TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINATION AND 7 IT A NO. 460 /BANG/201 8 CONSIDERATION IN THE LIGHT OF CONTENTIONS PUT FORTH IN WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AND THOSE DETAILS FILED BEFORE THE CIT ( APPEALS) IN PAPER BOOK (PAGES 1 TO 20) PLACED BEFORE US ON 8.6.2018. NEEDLESS TO ADD THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL ALLOW THE ASSESSEE ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD IN THE MATTER AND TO FILE FURTHER WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS / DETAILS IN SUPPORT OF ITS CLAIM; WHICH SHALL BE DULY CONSIDERED BEFORE PASSING ORDERS. WE HOLD AND DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. CONSEQUENTLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE (SUPRA) ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 15 IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE, 201 8 . SD/ - (N.V. VASUDEVAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (JASON P BOAZ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DT. 15 .06.2018. *REDDY GP 8 IT A NO. 460 /BANG/201 8 COPY TO : 1 APPELLANT 4 CIT(A) 2 RESPONDENT 5 DR. ITAT, BANGALORE 3 CIT 6 GUARD FILE SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE.