Sh. Sharad Malhotra, Mandi V. ITO, Mandi

ITA 806/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6562 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 11-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGH
• Section: 194C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 806/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 SH. SHARAD MALHOTRA, VS. THE ITO, WARD, PROP M/S WIRE COMMUNICATION SYSTEM MANDI MOTI BAZAR, MANDI, H.P. PAN NO.ADQPM5666B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SH. AJAY JAIN RESPONDENT BY : SH. MANJIT SINGH DATE OF HEARING : 14.12.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.12.2017 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.03.2017 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)]-PALAMPUR. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ACTION OF THE L OWER AUTHORITIES IN MAKING ADDITION OF RS. 73,56,294/- U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF NON-DEDUCTION OF TDS AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTI ON 194C OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMI TTED THAT THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS 2006-07. HE HAS FURTHER INVITED OUT ATTENTION TO THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND STATED THAT THE PROVISIONS REQUIRING AN INDIVIDUAL TO DEDUCT TAX U/S 194C HAVE BEEN BROUGHT OUT ON THE STATUTE BY FINANCE ACT, 2007 W.E.F. 1.6.2007 AND AR E APPLICABLE FOR THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008- 09, WHEREAS THE YEAR INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS PRIOR TO THE AFOR ESAID DATE. HE, THEREFORE, HAS SUBMITTED THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVID UAL, HENCE, THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194C WERE NOT APPLICABLE TO AN INDIVIDUA L SO FAR AS THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION I.E. 2006-07 IS CONCERNED. HE IN THI S RESPECT HAS RELIED UPON THE DECISION OF THE CHANDIGARH BENCH OF THE TRIBUNA L IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. PRITAM KAUR KAHLON (2014) 30 ITR (TRIB.) 0710 (CHANDIGARH ), WHEREIN ON IDENTICAL FACTS, THE TRIBUNAL HAS HELD THAT SINC E THE TAX US 194C WAS NOT DEDUCIBLE BY AN INDIVIDUAL FOR AN YEAR PRIOR TO 1. 6.2007, HENCE, NO DISALLOWANCE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT WAS CALLED FO R. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, WE FIND MERIT I N THE LEGAL GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES U/S 40(A)( (IA) OF THE ACT FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE EYES OF LAW AND THE SAME IS ACCO RDINGLY ORDERED TO BE DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS HER EBY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 14 TH DEC., 2017 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR