Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 1318 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194C - freight charges paid by the assessee - Whether the assessee is working as an agent only or as independent transporter? - HELD THAT -To our mind if the AO was not satisfied with the details furnished by the assessee then he should have required the assessee to furnish the details for the entire year. Moreover we note that the AO in the remand proceeding has not pointed out any defect in the submission filed by the assessee. Accordingly we note that the assessee was merely acting as an agent. Accordingly the assessee is not liable to deduct the TDS on the payment made to the truck owners. Whether the assessee received duly filled form 15-I from the truck owners before the date of credit or payment which-ever is earlier? - We note that the assessee has furnished a list of 340 parties along with their addresses truck numbers with the date of registration and the date of form 15 I. On perusal of the same we note that all the details of the truck owners were furnished before the AO. However the AO has not carried out any verification of such details to prove them erroneous by issuing notice to any of the party under section 133(6)/131 of the Act. The assessee is absolved the from the provisions of the TDS once he has collected from 15 I before making the payment to them or crediting their account. There is no ambiguity to the fact that the necessary forms 15 I were collected by the assessee within time. This fact has not been controverted by the learned DR for the Revenue. Indeed the assessee is under the obligation to file a report to the commission of income tax in form 15 J after compiling all the details collected in the form 15 I but this requirement is procedural as held by this tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Andhra Roadways 2015 (7) TMI 1317 - ITAT AHMEDABAD We note that the assessee has duly complied the provisions of section 194-C of the Act by collecting the requisite 15-I forms and therefore the assessee is not liable to deduct the TDS on the payment made to the transporters. Hence the ground of appeal of the revenue is dismissed.
Issues:
1. Non-deduction of tax under section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Validity of deletion of addition made by the Assessing Officer. Analysis: 1. The primary issue in this case revolves around the non-deduction of tax under section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contended that the addition of ?3,49,02,235/- made by the Assessing Officer should not have been deleted by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (Ld. CIT(A)). The Assessing Officer found that the assessee had made freight payments without deducting TDS, leading to the disallowance of the sum under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) initially upheld this decision, but the matter was restored to the Ld. CIT(A) by the ITAT for fresh adjudication with specific directions. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) called for necessary details from the assessee, who provided evidence supporting their claim of working as a transport commission agent and not owning any trucks. The Ld. CIT(A) admitted additional evidence, despite objections from the AO, and ultimately deleted the addition based on the submissions made by the assessee. The ITAT, in its analysis, noted that the assessee acted as an agent and was not required to deduct TDS on payments to truck owners. Additionally, the ITAT found that the assessee had collected Form 15-I before making payments, absolving them from TDS obligations. 3. The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, emphasizing that the assessee had complied with the provisions of section 194-C by collecting the necessary forms and therefore was not liable to deduct TDS. The ITAT's decision was based on the understanding that non-compliance with certain procedural formalities did not affect the deductibility of tax under section 40(a)(ia). The appeal filed by the Revenue was ultimately dismissed, upholding the deletion of the addition made by the Assessing Officer. This detailed analysis highlights the key legal arguments and findings in the judgment, addressing the issues raised by the Revenue and the assessee regarding the non-deduction of tax under section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
|