Kayee Project Equipments Pvt. ltd., Kolkata V. ITO, WD-8(3), KOLKATA, Kolkata

ITA 740/KOL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4255 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-11-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-04-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GHYAS UDDINJCIT
• Assessee Lawyers: MIRAJ D. SHAH
• Section: 194C; 147

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 740/KOL/16 M/S. KAYEE PROJECT EQUIPMENTS P.LTD 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,D BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE : SHRI WASEEM AHMED,ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 740/KOL/2016 A.Y: 2006-07 M/S. KAYEE PROJECT VS. I.T.O., WARD 8(3),K OLKATA EQUIPMENTS P.LTD PAN: AABCK9053H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPEARANCES BY: SHRI MIRAJ D.SHAH, ADVOCATE, AR FOR THE ASSE SSEE SHRI GHYAS UDDIN,JCIT, SR.DR FOR THE REVE NUE DATE OF HEARING : 10-11-2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11- 11-2016 O R D E R SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :- THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23/02/2016 PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCO ME TAX(APPEALS), 18, KOLKATA U/S. 250 OF THE I.T ACT, 1961 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IN THIS APPEAL IS TO BE DECIDED A S TO WHETHER THE CIT(A) JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDI TION MADE BY THE AO U/S. 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT IN THE FACTS AND C IRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THIS CASE THAT THE ASSESSEE I S A COMPANY DEALING IN TRANSPORT AND TRANSPORT CONTRACTORS. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF RS.2,5 6,533/- ON ITA NO. 740/KOL/16 M/S. KAYEE PROJECT EQUIPMENTS P.LTD 2 02/11/2006. THE SAID RETURN WAS PROCESSED U/S. 143( 1) ON 30- 09-2007. THEREAFTER, THE AO INITIATED PROCEEDINGS U /S. 147 OF THE ACT, WHEREIN ON THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE DI D NOT DEDUCT TDS ON THE PAYMENT TO AN EXTENT OF RS.1,08,2 4,104/- TOWARDS LORRY HIRE CHARGES. ON PERUSAL OF BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND LEDGER ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE THE AO FOUND THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS PAID AMOUNT EXCEEDING RS.50,000/- AGGREGATE PAY MENTS DURING THE YEAR, ON WHICH TDS WAS NOT DEDUCTED. THU S, THE AO DISALLOWING RS.4,72,027/- U/S. 40(A)(IA) PASSED HIS ORDER U/S. 143(3)/147 OF THE ACT ON 30-12-2010. 4. THE CIT-A HAS CONFIRMED THE IMPUGNED ADDITION A S MADE BY THE AO BY OBSERVING THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BR OUGHT ANYTHING ON RECORD TO SHOW AS TO HOW IT DISCHARGED ITS RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING DEDUCTION OF TAXES ON SUCH PAYMENTS TOWARDS LORRY HIRE CHARGES. 5. AGGRIEVED BY SUCH ORDER OF THE CIT-A THE ASSESSE E PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 6. THE LD. AR SUBMITS THAT THE AO ADDED SUCH AMOUNT TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE PAYMENTS WERE MADE TOWARDS L ORRY HIRE CHARGES INDEPENDENTLY. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT LORRY HIRE CHARGES ARE INCLUSIVE OF REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPE NSES, WHICH NEEDS TO BE EXCLUDED WHILE CALCULATING THE PAYMENT EXCEEDING RS.50,000/-. IT WAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IN NONE OF THE CASE THE PAYMENT TO THE PARTIES WAS EXCEEDING MORE THAN THE LIMIT SPECIFIED U/S. 194C OF THE ACT. IN SUPPORT OF HIS C ONTENTIONS , HE REFERRED TO PAGE NO. 26 TO 44 OF THE PAPER BOOK TO SHOW THAT THE AMOUNTS PAID ON SUCH MEMOS TOWARDS PURCHASE OF HIGH SPEED DIESEL CHARGES. THE LD. AR ALSO ARGUED THAT T HESE DOCUMENTS WERE NOT FILED BEFORE THE AO DURING THE C OURSE OF ITA NO. 740/KOL/16 M/S. KAYEE PROJECT EQUIPMENTS P.LTD 3 ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND URGED TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR VERIFICATION OF THE SAME. 7. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD.DR HAS OBJECTED TO THE SAME AND SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PRODUCE SUCH DO CUMENTS EITHER BEFORE THE AO OR AT LEAST BEFORE THE CIT-A. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE FIND THAT THE CIT-A HAS CA TEGORICALLY OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE ANYTHING TO DIS CHARGE ITS RESPONSIBILITY REGARDING DEDUCTION OF TAXES ON PAYM ENTS OF LORRY HIRE CHARGES. ACCORDING TO THE LD. AR AS SUBMITTED BEFOR E US THAT SUCH HIRE CHARGES INCLUDE THE PAYMENTS MADE TOWARDS HIGH SPEE D DIESEL CHARGES. ADMITTEDLY, THE BREAK UP AS PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSE E IN THE PAPER BOOK PAGES 26 TO 44 THESE DETAILS WERE NOT AVAILABLE BEF ORE THE AO DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT THE CIT-A HAS PASSED HIS ORDER EX-PARTE WITHOUT GIVING REASONABLE OPPORTUNIT Y OF BEING HEARD. TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES OF THE CASE, SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.AR FOR THE ASSESSEE AND IN TH E INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMAND THE CASE TO THE FILE OF THE CIT-A FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE AT LIBERT Y TO FILE REQUISITE EVIDENCES, IF ANY, TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS CLAIM. THE A SSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO CO-OPERATE IN FURTHER APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS WITH OUT SEEKING ANY FURTHER ADJOURNMENT. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 11 TH NOVEMBER,2016 SD/- SD/- WASEEM AHMED S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 11 /11/ 2016 ITA NO. 740/KOL/16 M/S. KAYEE PROJECT EQUIPMENTS P.LTD 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT/ ASSESSEE: M/S. KAYEE PROJECT EQUIPMENTS PVT. LTD C/O V.N PUROHIT & CO, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS, DIAMON D CHAMBERS, UNIT-III, 4 TH FLOOR, SUIT NO.4G,4 CHOWRINGHEE LANE, KOL-16. 2 THE RESPONDENT/ DEPARTMENT: INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 8(3), AAYKAR BHAWAN, P-7 CHOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-700 069. 3 4. / THE CIT(A) THE CIT 5 . DR, KOLKATA BENCH 6 . GUARD FILE . **PP/SPS TRUE COPY, BY ORDER, AS STT REGISTRAR