2012 (6) TMI 813 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance expenses u/s 40 (a)(ia) - amount paid in the year - Held that - It is not clear from the orders of the lower authorities whether this amount of 1, 38, 30, 000/- has been paid during the financial year relevant to the assessment year under appeal to the transporters or not therefore this fact requires verification at the end of the A.O. and for this purpose the matter is hereby set aside to the file of the A.O. In case this amount is found to have been paid during the year no addition u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act is called for in view of the decision of M/s Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT 2012 (4) TMI 290 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against order confirming addition of expenses under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act.

Analysis:
The assessee appealed against the order confirming the addition of expenses under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act. The assessee declared commission income in the profit and loss account but discrepancies were noted by the Assessing Officer in the income received as per TDS certificates. The assessee explained that he arranges transportation on a contract basis with specific companies and deducts commission income. The Assessing Officer observed bank transactions showing payments to transporters exceeding a certain amount. The Assessing Officer sought an explanation for not deducting tax on these payments, invoking section 40(a)(ia). The assessee argued that he acts as an intermediary between contracting companies and transport owners, taking a flat commission. The Assessing Officer classified the assessee as a transport contractor, noting TDS deductions and audit reports. The Assessing Officer disallowed expenses under section 40(a)(ia) due to non-deduction of TDS.

In the appeal, the assessee contended that payments to transporters were made without deducting tax, citing a special Bench decision. The assessee argued that section 40(a)(ia) should not apply to payments actually made during the previous year without tax deduction. The assessee requested deletion of the addition based on this argument. The Departmental Representative supported the lower authorities' decision. The Tribunal found ambiguity regarding whether the disputed amount was paid during the relevant financial year. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for verification. If the payment was made during the year, no addition under section 40(a)(ia) would be warranted, following the precedent set by the special Bench decision.

Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, setting aside the addition of expenses under section 40(a)(ia) pending verification by the Assessing Officer.