JHARKHAND STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED,RANCHI V. ACIT, C.C.1, RANCHI

ITA 38/RAN/2025

AI Insights

The case involves the Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited appealing against the order of the CIT(A), Patna-3, which disallowed 30% of certain expenses due to non-deduction of TDS. The assessee argued that these expenses were crystallized in subsequent years when TDS was deducted and paid. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had not considered all grounds raised, particularly the ground seeking the benefit of expenditure in the year TDS was deducted. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and remanded the matter for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2026] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 827863 (ITAT-RANCHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-01-2026
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 25-02-2025
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside; Opportunity of being heard; TDS

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 38/Ran/2025 (Assessment Year-2018-19) Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Limited, Utpad Bhawan, Kanke Road, Ranchi-834008. PAN No. AACCJ 5622 N Vs. A.C.I.T., Central Circle-1, Ranchi. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee represented by Shri S.K. Bathwal, A.R. Department represented by Shri Rajib Jain, CIT-DR Date of hearing 05/01/2026 Date of pronouncement 05/01/2026 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Patna-3, Patna in Appeal No. CIT(A), Patna-3/10513/2017-18 dated 24/12/2024 for the A.Y. 2018-19. 2. Shri S.K. Bathwal, ld. A.R. is represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Rajib Jain, ld. CIT-DR represented on behalf of the revenue. 3. The ld. CIT-DR has sought adjournment on the ground that he is the CIT(A) who has passed the impugned order which is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. It was submitted by the ld. AR that in ground No.9 of the appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee has categorically raised a ground that in the event that the addition is being confirmed in regard to the non-deduction of TDS then the assessee should be granted the benefit of the expenditure in the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 38/Ran/2025 Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Ltd. Vs ACIT 2 year in which the deduction of TDS is made and the amounts paid to the respective payees. It was a submission by the ld. AR that the ld. CIT(A) has not considered these grounds. It was a further submission that in ground No. 7 of the appeal filed before the Tribunal also the assessee has raised the same ground. It was a submission by the ld. AR that the assessee is a Government of Jharkhand undertaking which is being entrusted with the responsibility of marketing of liquor by an order of the government dated 01/08/2017. It was a submission that consequent to the said order, retail operation of the sale of liquor had been initiated and premises had also been taken on rent and contract staffs had also been appointed. It was a submission that the due to the dispute in regard to the quantum of payment due, payments had been claimed as provisions in the balance sheet and the expenditure claimed in the Profit and Loss account. It was a submission that on account of non-deduction of TDS, the Assessing Officer had disallowed 30% of the said expenses on which the TDS had not been deducted. It was a submission that the amounts had been crystallized during the subsequent years and the amounts paid and the TDS deducted and paid to the account of the Central Government. It was a submission that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be reversed. 5. We have considered the submission. We have also perused the order of the ld. CIT(A). As mentioned by the ld. AR that it is an admitted fact that the ld. CIT(A) has not been adjudicated ground No. 9 of the grounds filed before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. AR has also not been able to show as to how these Printed from counselvise.com ITA No. 38/Ran/2025 Jharkhand State Beverages Corporation Ltd. Vs ACIT 3 provisions are allowable as an expenditure at all. In any case, these are not the issues before the Tribunal and as it is noticed that the subsequent payments as also the issues of the provisions have not been considered by the ld. CIT(A) in his order, the order of ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication of all the grounds raised before the ld. CIT(A). It would do well if the ld. CIT(A) grants the assessee a personal opportunity of being heard. 6. In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order announced in open court on 05/01/2026 Sd/- Sd/- (RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY) (GEORGE MATHAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ranchi, Dated: 05/01/2026 *Ranjan Copy to: 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. CIT 4. DR By order 5. Guard File Sr. Private Secretary, ITAT, Ranchi Printed from counselvise.com "