2015 (11) TMI 914 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act - non deduction of TDS u/s 194C on payments made to the so called transporters - Held that - Assessing Officer failed to appreciate that there is no privity of contract between the assessee and the truck owners. He simply hired the vehicles from the owners and the entire risk of carrying the goods lies with him only and therefore privity of the contract does not lie with the assessee and the truck owners. Therefore there is no liability to deduct tax at source in respect of such payments - Decided in favour of assessee.

Issues:
1. Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for failure to deduct tax at source.
2. Disallowance of certain business expenses.
3. Disallowance related to breakage deduction.
4. Allegation of the appellate order being against the law and natural justice.

Issue 1: Disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for failure to deduct tax at source:
The appellant contested the disallowance of Rs. 96,58,950 under section 40(a)(ia) for not deducting tax at source on payments made to transporters. The appellant argued that there was no privity of contract between the assessee and the transporter, as the assessee acted as a middleman on a commission basis. The appellant further contended that even if section 194C applied, as there were no outstanding payments as of March 31, 2008, no disallowance should be made. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, citing judicial pronouncements to support the view that there was no liability to deduct tax at source due to the lack of privity of contract. The Tribunal held that the issue was debatable, and therefore, no disallowance was warranted.

Issue 2: Disallowance of certain business expenses:
The appellant challenged the disallowance of Rs. 2,09,083 from various expenses, arguing that they were legitimate business expenditures incurred solely for business purposes. The Tribunal noted that the expenses were properly vouched and essential for the business's operation. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, stating that the expenses were allowable as they were incurred wholly and exclusively for the business.

Issue 3: Disallowance related to breakage deduction:
The appellant contested the disallowance of Rs. 3,66,285 for breakage deduction, asserting that such deductions were common in the business and should be allowed as business losses under relevant sections of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found the disallowance arbitrary and unjustified, emphasizing that such deductions were essential for determining the appellant's true business income. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, directing the deletion of the disallowance.

Issue 4: Allegation of the appellate order being against the law and natural justice:
The appellant raised concerns that the appellate order was against the law and natural justice. However, the Tribunal did not find merit in this argument and focused its decision on the specific issues raised regarding the disallowances and deductions under the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, concluding that the disallowances were not justified based on the circumstances and legal interpretations presented during the proceedings.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellant on all contested issues related to disallowances and deductions under the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2007-08.

← Previous Next →