ITO, Ludhiana V. Sh. Raghubir Moudgill, Ludhiana

MA 46/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1034 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 06-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 22-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDRA KANTA
• Assessee Lawyers: PANKAJ BHALLA

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A. NO. 46/CHD/2018 (IN ITA NO. 1022/CHD/2016) (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2010-11) THE ITO VS. SH. RAGHUBIR MOUDGILL WARD-7(3) 35-A, RAGHUNATH ENCLAVE LUDHIANA LUDHIANA PAN: ADUPM6717H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI. PANKAJ BHALLA DEPARTMENT BY : SMT. CHANDRAKANTA DATE OF HEARING : 10/08/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06/09/2018 O R D E R PER DR.B.R.R.KUMAR, A.M . : THE PRESENT MISC. APPLICATION HAVE BEEN FILED BY TH E REVENUE PRAYING FOR MODIFICATION OF THE ORDER DATED 28/08/2017 IN ITA 1 022/CHD/2016 PERTAINING TO 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. APROPOS THE RECTIFICATION APPLICATION WHEREIN TH E ASSESSING OFFICER HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSETS SIDE OF THE BALANCE SHEE T OF THE ASSESSEE SHOWS THAT OUT OF THE TOTAL PAYMENT OF RS.1,96,90,000/- MADE T O CONTRACTORS DURING THE YEAR, THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN ADVANCE OF RS.6,47,665 /- TO M/S. VIKAS COMMUNICATION AND NO TDS WAS DEDUCTED IN THE RELEVA NT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 ON THIS PAYMENT MADE TO M/S. VIKAS COMMUNIC ATION, WHICH HAS BEEN CLAIMED AS EXPENSES ALSO ON ACCRUAL BASIS IN A.Y. 2 010-11. THE COPY OF LEDGER ACCOUNT AND BALANCE SHEET OF THE ASSESSEE IS ENCLOS ED ALONGWITH THE M.A. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SUBMITTED THAT THE ITAT HAS ALLOW ED ALL THE EXPENSES MADE TOWARDS PAYMENTS FOR THE JOB WORK CHARGES INCLUDING RS.6,47,665/- PAID TO M/S. VIKAS COMMUNICATION ALSO ON WHICH TDS WAS NOT MADE IN THE RELEVANT YEAR. THIS AMOUNT SHOULD HAVE TO BE DISALLOWED IN THE RELEVANT YEAR 2010-11 IN VIEW OF THE 2 FACT THAT TDS ON THIS ADVANCE PAID TO M/S. VIKAS CO MMUNICATION WAS MADE AND PAID IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR. 3. AGAINST THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED AS UNDER: OPENING BALANCE 7,11,168.00 JOB WORK EXPENDITURE 1,25,00,000.00 GENERAL CREDIT 1,00,000.00 TOTAL 1,33,11,168.00 BANK PAYMENT 1,38,21,430.00 TDS 1,37,403.00 CLOSING BALANCE (6,47,665.00) 4. IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE DEDUCTION OF TDS WAS COMM ENSURATE WITH PAYMENT AND IN FACT MORE THAN 1% OF THE EXPENDITURE SO CLAIMED. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT NO EXPENDITURE HAS BEEN DEBITED ON A CCOUNT OF THE ADVANCE PAYMENT OF RS. 6,47,665/- SO, NO DISALLOWANCE CAN B E MADE. 5. LD. DR COULD NOT CONTROVERT THE FACTS ON RECORD. 6. HENCE, THE MISC. APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENU E IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY GARG) (DR. B.R.R. K UMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 06/09/2018 AG COPY TO: 1.THE APPELLANT, 2. THE RESPONDENT, 3. THE CIT(A), 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR