9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the learned CIT(A). 2. The Department has raised the following grounds of appeal. "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in deleting the addition of Rs.31,20,452 u/s.41(1) of the I.T.Act on account of remission of liability on the ground that no such addition can be made by the A.O. unless there is cessation of liability. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in deleting the disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of Rs.2,56,85,775 made by wrongly holding that the payments were in the nature of payment to Sub-contractors u/s.194C and not rent payments u/s.194I. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) was not justified to admit additional evidences in the form of agreements with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration of the material made available to the Tribunal and analyzing the same in the light of the submissions of both the parties, the undisputed facts relating to the issues are that the assessee filed its return of income for the period under consideration showing total income of Rs.7,51,830. This return was selected for scrutiny and after issuing statutory notices, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment after hearing the assessee and perusing the material made available before him and ultimate passed the assessment order on 7.12.2010 making additions of Rs. 31,20,452 on account of hiring charges not taken into account, Rs.2,56,85,775 towards disallowance out of hiring charges. 6. Having been aggrieved with the said assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bhai (134 ITR 214) and the in the case of CIT v. Shree Mahalaxmi Transport Co. (339 ITR 484). 8. The learned AR of the assessee, on the other hand, supported the impugned order of the learned CIT(A). 9. On careful analysis of the order passed by the learned CIT(A) it is found that the learned CIT(A) has considered these issues in the impugned order threadbare with reference to the material made available in the assessment records and taking into consideration the views expressed by the Assessing Officer and ultimately came to the conclusion that the amount of Rs.31,20,450 which rebates to the receipts from Balaji Associates. The assessee has shown a liability of Rs.47,81,733 against the said party whereas the balance as on 31.3.2007 was s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontract to some contractors and against such contract the assessee had deducted 1% of TDS u/s.194C of the I.T.Act, which the Assessing Officer observed as not correct and he came to the conclusion that deduction must be @10% holding that the machineries have been used on hire basis which is exgiibel to TDS @10% u/s.194I of the I.T.Act. Thus, he made the disallowance of Rs.2,56,85,775 u/s.40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act. While considering this issue, the learned CIT(A) has observed in paragraph 5.1 of his order that the expression of Section 194C defines that for carrying on any work includes the use of labour, transportation and other miscellaneous activities jointly taken up for completion of the works. That being so he opined that the deduction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
