9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. order was not barred by limitation on such flimsy and irrelevant logic is unreasonable, vitiated and illegal and unsustainable in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. For that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is wholly unjustified in confirming the addition of Rs.1,15,972 as unaccounted sale brushing aside all the submissions and material produced before him and therefore the order being illegal, bad in law and arbitrary should be interfered with in the facts and circumstance of the case. 3. For that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should have deleted the disallowance of Rs.60,92,836 u/s. 40(a) (ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the facts and circumstances of the case and is not ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the tax deducted at source by the stipulated date specified in Section 200(1) of the I.T.Act. He disallowed the sum of Rs.60,92,836 on the basis of expenses claimed subject to deduction of tax at source u/s.194C, 194J and 194H. Invoking the provisions u/s.145A he also reconciled the sales as given in the P and L account to the gross sales including sales tax paid, entry tax paid considered under the provisions of Section 43B. He considered suppression of sales amounting to Rs.1,15,972. He also considered TDS default for levy of interest u/s.200(1A) amounting to Rs.15,175 which was taken up by the Assessing Officer in separate proceedings. Aggrieved the assessee appealed before the first appellate authority who confirmed the additions u/s.40 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be paid or deducted before the due date of filing of return indicates that the assessee being a limited Company was to file the return on 31.10.2005. He noted that all the payments for tax deduction at source under the various Sections in Chapter XVIIB have been paid in accordance with the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia), therefore could not be subjected to interpolate the date when the amount of credit was given for the income which remained either paid or payable to the payee. Therefore, it is apparent on the order itself that the assessee was entitled to make the payment of TDS till the due date of filing of the return when the due date of payment of TDS was the first week of the immediately proceeding month for the Assessment Year 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions of Section 40(a)(ia) insofar as the tax at source which has been deducted was to be paid in accordance with the provisions of Section 200(1). The Assessing Officer has categorically given a finding regarding withholding of tax by the assessee but not paying in accordance with the provisions of Section 200(1) leading to charging to interest u/s.200(1A) amounting to Rs.15,175. The disallowance, therefore, was in accordance with the provisions of the Act when, irrespective of the expenses whether paid or payable, the assessee ought to have shown the deduction of tax at source within the financial year itself was confirmed by the learned CIT(A) when he noted that the actual date of payment was in the end of the previous year but before th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore cannot be subjected to scrutiny under the provisions of the I.T.Act as sought to be challenged by the assessee as of now. We are of the considered opinion that the merit additions and disallowance rather lean in favour of the assessee for deletion would clearly indicate the lethargy of the Assessing Officer in liquidating the demand so created within the limitation as provided in that Section. The Assessing Officer had clearly noted as confirmed by the learned CIT(A) that the assessee was entitled to claim deduction of the expenses under the provisions of law which was subjected to deduction of tax u/s.194C, 194H and 194J. On page 5 of the order of the learned CIT(A) a clarity has been identified by the learned CIT(A) itself that fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... les tax and entry tax liability pertain to other years. Cess, duties and taxes cannot be reduced from the turnover pertaining to other years. The law provides for claiming of deduction u/s.43B as and when paid therefore cannot be subjected to reconciliation to determine the net sales as declared in the P and L account and the gross sales as per the books of account. The suppression of sales, therefore as confirmed by the learned CIT(A), suffers from clarity insofar as the explanation was to seek to reconcile of the purchases and sales by identifying the stock missing against which no infirmity has been found. We have found that the reconciliation by the Assessing Officer was bad in as has been supported by the CIT(A) therefore is bound to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
