M/s PJSC Stroytransgaz, Gurgaon V. DDIT, Intl. Taxation, New Delhi

ITA 5485/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87040 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 24-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 07-10-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SIDDHU

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM AND S HRI A.T. VARKEY, JM ITA NO. 5 485 /DEL/20 1 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 200 7 - 08 PJSC STROYTRANSGAZ, C/O DEEPAK CHOPRA, 140, ASPEN GREENS, NIRVANA COUNTRY, SOUTH CITY II, SECTOR 50, GURGAON. PAN: AA HCS2254E VS. DDIT, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, CIRCLE 2(2), NEW DELHI. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI HARPREET SINGH, ADVOCATE DEPARTMENT BY : S MT. SIDDHU, CIT, DR DATE OF HEARING : 24.03.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25 .03.2015 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, AM : THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 11.03. 2012 IN RELATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 7 - 08 . ITA NO.5485/DEL/2013 2 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL IS AGAINST THE UPHOLDING OF DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE AO AMOUNTING TO RS.55,47,237/ - IN RESPECT OF SALARY EXPENSES INCURRED IN THE EARLIER YEAR, BUT CLAIMED AS DEDUCTION, BY HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH A COPY OF CHALLAN OF PAYMENT OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SO URCE AMOUNTING TO RS.18,50,514 . 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT IN THE ORIGINAL ROUND OF ASSESSMENT, THERE WAS DISALLOWANCE, INTER ALIA , FOR A SUM OF RS.55,47,237/ - ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FURNISH EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF PAYMENT OF TAX AT SOURCE ON THE SALARY PAID. THE TRIBUNAL REMITTED THE MATTER TO THE AO FOR ALLOWING DEDUCTION OF RS. 55.47 LAC, AFTER VERIFICATION OF TDS CHALLAN IN RESPECT OF WHICH TAX WAS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN PAID DURING THE YEAR. DURING THE COURSE OF FRESH PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO FURNISH EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF TDS PAYMENTS RELATING TO THE EARLIER YEAR. SINCE THE ASSESSEE WAS UNABLE T O PRODUCE THE SAME, THE AO DID NOT ALLOW ANY DEDUCTION. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THAT THE PAYMENT OF TAX WAS MADE, BUT, THE CHALLAN WAS NOT TRACEABLE. THE ASSESSEE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO ITA NO.5485/DEL/2013 3 CHANGE IN A CCOUNTANTS , THE CHALLAN EVIDENCING THE PAYMENT WAS MISPLACED. THE ASSESSEE POSTED A QUERY ON THE OLTAS SYSTEMS AND OBTAINED A CONFIRMATION OF THE SAID PAYMENT, A COPY OF WHICH WAS PLACED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AS ANNEXURE - C. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY THAT THE SALARY OF RS.55.47 LAC WAS SUO MOTU DISALLOWED IN THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 0 7 ON ACCOUNT OF NON - DEPOSIT OF TAX AT SOURCE. SINCE, THE TAX AT SOURCE AMOUNTING TO RS.18,50,514/ - WAS DEPOSITED DURING THE YEAR , THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THAT DEDUCTION OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN ALLOWED. THE LD. CIT(A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO, CONFIRMED THE DISALLOWANCE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN THE FIRST ROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS DIRECTED TO PRODUCE EVIDENCE IN RESPECT OF TDS ON SALARIES AMOUNTING TO RS.55.47 LAC FOR WHICH DEDUCTION WAS CLAIMED DURING THE YEAR IN QUESTION. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE TDS CHALLAN WAS LOST BECAUSE OF CHANGE IN A CCOUNTANTS. HOWEVER, THE ITA NO.5485/DEL/2013 4 ASSESSEE OBTAINED CONFIRMATION FROM OLTAS, A COPY OF WHICH I S PLACED ON PAGE 12 OF THE PAPER BOOK, WHICH TRANSPIRES THAT TAX AT SOURCE TO THE TUNE OF RS.18,50,514/ - WAS RECEIVED ON 15.06.2006. PAGE NO.17 OF THE PAPER BOOK IS A COPY OF THE ASSESSEE S BANK ACCOUNT WHICH ALSO EVIDENCES A PAYMENT OF RS.18,50,514/ - ON 13 TH JUNE, 2006. THIS CONFIRMATION ALSO DIVULGES THE NATURE OF PAYMENT AS `PAY OF EMPLOYEES OTHER THAN GOVT. EMPLOYEES . IN THE ABSENCE OF THE AVAILABILITY OF CHALLAN, ONE THING IS CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE DID DEPOSIT TAX AMOUNTING TO RS.18,50,514/ - ON 15.06.2006 AND THE NATURE OF PAYMENT GIVEN BY OLTAS IS UNDOUBTEDLY `S ALARIES . THESE FACTS MAKE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THE ASSESSEE DID D EPOSIT TAX AT SOURCE AMOUNTING TO RS.18,50,514/ - AFTER MAKING DEDUCTION FROM SALARIES . HOWEVER, THE ONLY SHORTCOMING IS ABOUT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NEXUS OF THIS AMOUNT OF TAX WITH THE SALARY OF RS.55,47,237/ - FOR WHICH DEDUCTION HAS BEEN CLAIMED DURING TH E YEAR. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES, WE SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND REMIT THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF AO WITH THE DIRECTION TO THE ASSESSEE TO PRODUCE DETAIL OF SALARIES AMOUNTING TO RS.55,47,237/ - AND CO - RELATE IT WITH THE AMOUNT OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURC E AT RS.18,50,514/ - . IN CASE THE ASSESSEE ITA NO.5485/DEL/2013 5 SHOWS THAT TDS OF RS.18,50,514/ - IS IN RELATION TO THE SALARY OF RS.55,47,237/ - , THEN, THE DEDUCTION SHOULD BE ALLOWED. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 5 . 0 3 .201 5 . S D / - S D / - [ A.T. VARKEY ] [ R.S. SYAL ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED, 2 5 T H MARCH, 201 5 . DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.