Asia Pacific International, Tiruppur V. ITO, Tiruppur

ITA 671/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6061 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 05-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 20-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K RAVI
• Assessee Lawyers: MRS B JAISHEILA
• Keywords: Condonation of delay

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: CHENNAI , , ! BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.3480/MDS/2016 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 M/S.ASIA PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL, NO.736, P.N.ROAD, TIRUPUR-641 602. VS. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF- INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, TIRUPUR. [PAN: AAEFA 9605 K ] ( % /APPELLANT) ( &'% /RESPONDENT) ./ ITA NO.671/MDS/2017 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 M/S.ASIA PACIFIC INTERNATIONAL, NO.736, P.N.ROAD, TIRUPUR-641 602. VS. THE TAX RECOVERY OFFICER, TIRUPUR RANGE, TIRUPUR. [PAN: AAEFA 9605 K ] ( % /APPELLANT) ( &'% /RESPONDENT) % ( / APPELLANT BY : MRS.B.JAISHEILA, CA &'% ( /RESPONDENT BY : MR.K.RAVI, JCIT ( /DATE OF HEARING : 25.09.2017 ( /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.09.2017 ITA NO.3480/MDS/2016 & ITA NO.671/MDS/2017 :- 2 -: / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN , JUDICIAL MEMBER : ITA NO.3480/MDS/2016 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL S)-3, COIMBATORE, IN ITA NO.90/16-17 DATED 21.09.2016 FOR THE AY 2013-14 2. MR.K.RAVI, JCIT REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REV ENUE AND MRS.B.JAISHEILA, CA, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE APPEAL FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DELAYED BY 15 DAYS FOR WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS FI LED CONDONATION OF DELAY PETITION SPECIFYING THAT THE MOTHER-IN-LAW OF THE PERSON WHO WAS HANDLING THE TAX MATTERS OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY HA D EXPIRED ON 13.12.2016 AND IT WAS ONLY AFTER COMPLETING THE REL IGIOUS RITUALS SHE COULD RESUME DUTIES WHICH WAS RESULTED IN 15 DAYS DELAY. 4. THE LD.DR DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OBJECTIONS. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. AS TH E ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN JUSTIFIABLE REASONS FOR THE DELAY IN FILING O F THE APPEAL, THE DELAY OF 15 DAYS STANDS CONDONED AND THE APPEAL DISPOSED OFF ON MERITS. 6. ON MERITS, IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT TH E AO HAD DISALLOWED THE INTEREST PAYMENTS MADE TO NBFCS WITHOUT DEDUCTI NG THE TAX AT SOURCE BY APPLYING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. IT WAS A ITA NO.3480/MDS/2016 & ITA NO.671/MDS/2017 :- 3 -: SUBMISSION THAT NBFCS HAVE PAID TAXES ON THE INTERE ST PAYMENTS AND CONSEQUENTLY NO DISALLOWANCE U/S.40(A)(IA) WAS LIAB LE TO BE MADE. 7. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PRODUCED ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE NBFCS HAS PAID TAXES ON INTEREST PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THEM. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) WAS LIABLE TO BE CONFIRMED. 8. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ADMIT TEDLY, THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO BE DEDUCTED TDS ON THE INTEREST PAID T O THE NBFCS. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCTED THE TDS O N SUCH INTEREST PAID. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO UNABLE TO PRODUCE ANY EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT THE INTEREST PAID BY THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CONSIDERED I N THE INCOME BY NBFCS. THIS BEING SO, WE FIND NO ERROR IN THE ORDE R OF THE LD.CIT(A) OR THE AO, CONSEQUENTLY THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) STANDS CONFIRMED. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ITA NO.671/MDS/2017 FOR THE AY 2011-12: 10. ITA NO.671/MDS/2017 IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE A SSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3 , COIMBATORE, IN ITA NO.125/14-15 DATED 19.11.2015 FOR THE AY 2011-12. 11. MR.K.RAVI, JCIT REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE RE VENUE AND MRS.B.JAISHEILA, CA, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. ITA NO.3480/MDS/2016 & ITA NO.671/MDS/2017 :- 4 -: 12. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE APPEAL F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DELAYED BY 408 DAYS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT T HE DELAY WAS ON ACCOUNT OF THE MISPLACEMENT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) BY AN EMPLOYEE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OF THE AS SESSEE. THE AFFIDAVIT HAS BEEN FILED BY THE PARTNER OF THE ASSESSEES FIR M. THERE IS NO AFFIDAVIT OF THE CONCERNED CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT OR THE EMPLOY EE OF THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. CONSEQUENTLY, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL HAS NOT BEEN PROPERLY EXPLAINED. CONSEQ UENTLY, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON SEPTEMBER 25 , 2017, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 0 /DATED: SEPTEMBER 25, 2017. TLN ( &12 32 /COPY TO: 1. % /APPELLANT 4. 4 /CIT 2. &'% /RESPONDENT 5. 2 & /DR 3. 4 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF