2015 (8) TMI 409 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance on account of interest u/s 40(a)(ia) - non-deduction/late deposit of TDS - Held that - We have considered the submissions of both the parties and carefully gone through the material available on the record. In the present case it is noticed that the assessee deposited the TDS on the remittance of ₹ 8,60,713/- on 29.04.2004 in the next Financial Year but before filing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Since the assessee has deposited the TDS on 29.04.2004 before filing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act, therefore, by keeping in view the ratio laid down in the case of CIT Vs Rajinder Kumar 2013 (7) TMI 454 - DELHI HIGH COURT we delete the addition sustained by the ld. CIT(A). Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Reopening of assessment under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act.
2. Sustainment of disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.

Reopening of Assessment:
The appeal was against the order of ld. CIT(A)-XVIII, New Delhi, regarding the reopening of assessment under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act. The appellant argued that there was no failure to disclose all material facts necessary for income computation, thus challenging the legality of the reopening. The appellant contended that the reassessment was based on a mere change of opinion and not on a failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts. The AO relied on the Explanation to section 147 to allege inadequate disclosure. The CIT(A) upheld the action of the AO. However, the Tribunal analyzed the submissions and held that there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts necessary for income computation. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, emphasizing that the reassessment was not justified.

Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia):
The AO disallowed an amount under section 40(a)(ia) for alleged non-deduction/late deposit of TDS. The assessee argued that there was no default in TDS deduction, providing details and copies of challans to support their claim. The AO issued notices for rectifications, but no changes were made. Despite this, a notice under section 148 was issued. The ld. CIT(A) sustained a part of the disallowance, noting discrepancies in the interest remittance details. The Tribunal examined the case and observed that TDS was deposited before filing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Citing a precedent, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the TDS compliance was sufficient. Consequently, the addition sustained by the ld. CIT(A) was deleted, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's judgment addressed the issues of reopening assessment under section 147/148 and the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee in both instances, emphasizing the absence of failure to disclose material facts and the timely TDS compliance, respectively. The Tribunal's decision provided a detailed analysis of the legal provisions and precedents, ultimately leading to the allowance of the assessee's appeal.