2011 (9) TMI 927 - AT - Income Tax

Non-deduction of tax - Held that - The accept the assessee s claim that since he had the declarations of the payees in the prescribed form before him at the time when the interest was paid, he was not liable to deduct tax therefrom under section 194A. If he was not liable to deduct tax, section 40(a)(ia) is not attracted. There is no other ground taken by the income tax authorities to disallow the interest. We therefore accept the assessee s appeal.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS.
2. Necessity of filing Form 15J for non-deduction of tax.
3. Disallowance for payments made to transport agencies without deduction of tax.
4. Existence of a contract between the assessee and transport agencies.

Issue 1: Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS:
The Department appealed against the relief granted by the ld. CIT(A.) of &8377; 69,32,084 under section 40(a)(ia). The Assessing Officer disallowed this amount as the assessee made payments to sub-contractors without deducting tax at source as required under section 194C. The assessee argued being a new entrant with little knowledge of tax laws, but the disallowance was made despite audited accounts. The ITAT upheld the disallowance.

Issue 2: Necessity of filing Form 15J for non-deduction of tax:
The ld. CIT(A.) granted relief of &8377; 17,36,100 out of the disallowed amount, citing the submission of Form 15I by the assessee to truck owners, exempting them from TDS. The ITAT supported this decision based on the requirement of a contract for section 194C to apply, which was not proven by the Assessing Officer.

Issue 3: Disallowance for payments made to transport agencies without deduction of tax:
The disallowance of &8377; 51,95,984 for payments to transporters without TDS was challenged. The assessee clarified no sub-contract agreement existed, and transport operators were used to arrange trucks, not for carrying goods on behalf of the assessee. The ITAT dismissed the disallowance, emphasizing the absence of a contract between the assessee and the transport operators, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Kolkata High Court.

Issue 4: Existence of a contract between the assessee and transport agencies:
The ld. CIT(A.) deleted the disallowance, noting the lack of evidence of a contract between the assessee and transport operators or individual truck owners. The ITAT upheld this decision, citing the absence of a sub-contract assignment to transport operators and the necessity of a contract for section 194C to apply.

In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the relief granted by the ld. CIT(A.) in both the issues of Form 15I submission and absence of a contract with transport operators, resulting in the disallowance being unwarranted.