Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (10) TMI 204

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssessee, which is clear violation of principle of natural justice. It is not a case under Rule 46A(4) that the ld. CIT(A) had directed the assessee for production of any document to enable him to dispose of the appeal. - Matter remanded back to AO for denovo decision.
H.S. SIDHU, B.P. JAIN, JJ. Amrik Chand for the Appellant. J.S. Bhasin for the Respondent. ORDER 1. This appeal of the assessee arises from the order of the CIT(A), Amritsar, dated 21.12.2010 for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A), Amritsar, erred in deleting the addition of Rs.12,00,000/- made by the AO on the plea that the case of the assessee is squarely covered u/s 36(1)(viia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the facts that the assessee failed to furnish the details of assets classified by the Reserve Bank of India as doubtful assets or loss of assets is in accordance with guidelines issued by it in this behalf. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A), Amritsar, erred in deleting the addition of Rs.28,33,460/- made by the AO by observing that the payment .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ctually incurred. The AO had failed to appreciate that section 36(1)(viia) is amended by the Finance Act, 2007 to include co-operative banks for the purpose of allowability of deduction under this section retrospectively from Ist April, 2007 and subsequent years. This amendment was brought to give relief to the co-operative banks which have been withdrawn as a deduction under section 80P. Referring to the Rule 6ABA, it was observed that deduction under section 36(1)(viia) is a notional deduction, which is within the limits of the said section. Accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition. 5. As regards ground No.2, the brief facts are that the assessee has claimed Rs.26,33,460/- on account of hire of vehicles but no TDS had been deducted on account of payments made to the vehicle owners. Inspite of specific opportunities given to the assessee, the assessee failed to file any evidence that provisions of TDS are not applicable to the payments made for hired vehicles. Therefore, as per provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, the amount of TDS was not deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head profit and gains of business or profession on which tax is deductibl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ecific opportunity was given to the assessee to file any evidence that the provisions of TDS are not applicable. Payments were made to the owners of hired vehicles but the assessee failed to file such details. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee and without giving any opportunity to the AO has decided the issue, which is in violation of principle of natural justice. On merit, the Ld. DR argued that the assessee had not shown the provisions as to how the R.B.I. Act is applicable u/s 36(1)(viia), which specifically speaks of the provisions for bad and doubtful debt and no provision of standard on asset is there in the Income Tax Act. 7.1 As regards the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for hired vehicles, as per details placed before the ld. CIT(A), the payments have been made on periodical basis mostly on monthly basis, which can only be part of the contract. The total payments made periodically, monthly or half yearly have been bifurcated by the assessee only as hiring charges, petrol charges and other charges. The Ld. DR, therefore, prayed before the Bench to restore the order of the Assessing Officer by reversing the order of the ld. CI .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sessing Officer; or (c) where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing before the Assessing Officer any evidence which is relevant to any ground of appeal; or (d) where the Assessing Officer has made the order appealed against without giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant to adduce evidence relevant to any ground of appeal." 9.1 As per Rule 46A(2), no evidence can be admitted by the ld. CIT(A) under sub-rule (1) unless he records in writing the reasons for its admission. Under Rule 46A(3), it is clearly mentioned that the Ld. CIT(A) shall not take into account any evidence produced under sub-rule (1) unless the Assessing Officer has been allowed a reasonable opportunity to examine the evidence or document or to cross-examine the witness produced by the appellant, or to produce any evidence or document or any witness in rebuttal of the additional evidence produced by the appellant. As regards Rule 46A(4), it has also been mentioned that nothing contained in this rule shall affect the power of the CIT(A) to direct the production of any document to enable to dispose of the appeal, or for any other substantial cause including the enhancement of the ass .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates