2017 (3) TMI 1938 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 40(a)(ia) - non-deduction of tax at source towards courier charges paid - DR submitted before us that the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted the addition based on fresh evidence without obtaining a remand report from the AO - as requested that the matter may be remitted back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh consideration in the light of the evidence filed before the Ld. CIT(A) -HELD THAT - Since it is evident that fresh evidence was filed before the Ld. CIT(A) based on which the Ld. CIT(A) has held the issue in favour of the assessee we are of the considered view that the Ld. AO should also be given an fair opportunity to examine the fresh evidence placed before the Ld. CIT(A) for the first time. Therefore in the interest of justice we hereby remit the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for de-nova consideration. Appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding deletion of addition made under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source towards courier charges paid.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in response to the assessment finalized under Section 143(3) of the Act. The crux of the issue was the deletion of an addition of Rs. 3,59,47,376/- made by the Ld. AO under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source towards courier charges paid by the assessee, a private limited company engaged in multi-level marketing of goods and services. The Ld. CIT(A) had deleted this addition, prompting the Revenue to appeal.

The Ld. DR contended that the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition based on fresh evidence without obtaining a remand report from the Ld. AO. It was argued that the matter should be remitted back to the Ld. AO for fresh consideration in light of the evidence presented. Additionally, during the hearing, the Ld. AR representing the assessee failed to appear before the bench, further complicating the proceedings.

Upon considering the arguments, the tribunal found merit in the contention raised by the Ld. DR. It was observed that fresh evidence was indeed submitted before the Ld. CIT(A), influencing the decision in favor of the assessee. To ensure fairness and justice, the tribunal decided to remit the matter back to the Ld. AO for a de-nova consideration of the evidence presented for the first time before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the appeal of the Revenue was allowed for statistical purposes, and the order was pronounced on 15th March 2017 in Chennai.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal issues, arguments presented by both parties, and the tribunal's decision to remit the matter back to the assessing officer for a fresh examination of the evidence.