9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 733X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2014, was sent through the Departmental Representative on 20.11.2014. The Departmental Representative has filed a letter dated 28.11.2014 from the Income-tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Ahmedabad stating that the notice was served on the assessee on 28.11.2014. When the case was called for hearing, none was present on behalf of the assessee and neither any adjournment application was filed. Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue was disposed of considering the submissions of the Departmental Representative. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer has made addition u/s 40(a)(ia) of Rs. 11,31,786/- by observing as under:- "3. Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia)-labour/transport/professional charges On verification of the details filed during the course of assessment proceedings, it is noticed that the assessee has paid/credited labour/transport/carting charges in the following accounts without complying the provisions of section 194C r.w.s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act. Accordingly, vide this office order sheet entry dated 22/12/2009, the assessee was required to snow cause as to why an amount of Rs. 11,31,786/- should not be disallowed u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 196 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vered u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the I. T. Act, and the same is added to the total income. (B) Shiv Transport In the case of Shiv Transport also the assessee stated that it has credited Rs. 17,150/- and Rs. 16,450/- for two bills, hence, the provisions of section 194C is not applicable on these credits. The submission of the assessee is devoid of any merit. The assessee has paid Rs. 33,600/- by cheque on 20/03/2007. As such, the assessee was required to deduct tax on payment of Rs. 33,600/- as required u/s. 194C of the I. T. Act. In view of the above, the assessee's submission in this respect is rejected. As the assessee failed to deduct tax by making the payment of Rs. 33,600/-, the same is disallowable u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the I. T. Act and the same is added to the total income. (C) Shree Om Carting In case of Shree Om Carting the assessee submission is that it has credited an amount of Rs. 10,000/- and another amount of Rs. 12,500/- for two bills. Hence, the provision of section 194C is not applicable. The assessee's submission is found to be devoid of any merit. As per the assessee's own statement it has made payment of Rs. 22,500/- by one cheque on 12/07/2006. As the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment of Rs. 36,660/- covered u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the I. T. Act, and the same is added to the total income. (E) Mukesh G. Patel In respect of Rs. 7,00,000/- credited in this account, it is the contention of the assessee that the same is an advance which does not fall under the provision of section 194C of the I. T. Act. The submission in this respect is found to be devoid of any merit. The assessee has made advance of Rs. 7,00,000/- during the course of its contract with Mukesh G. Patel and the same Is squarely covered u/s. 194C of the I. T. Act, for the reason that section 194C provide that "any person responsible for paying any sum to any resident for carrying out any work...". The assessee also failed to prove the purpose of giving advance other than the contract activity with Mukesh G. Patel. In view of the above, the assessee's contention in this respect is rejected and the same is treated as advance against contract work. As such, the assessee required to deduct tax u/s. 194C of the I. T. Act. As the assessee failed to deduct the tax on this amount, the same is disallowable u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the I. T. Act. Accordingly, an amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- is disallowed and adde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of two bills of Rs. 10,000 and Rs. 12,500 both below Rs. 20,000 and therefore the AO is directed to delete the amount as section 194C is not applicable. 5 Ramesh Ramjibhai Patel Rs.2,40,000 194 C is not applicable as this person is there in Loans and Advances shown in the balance sheet. The appellant has given loan / advance to him. 6 Ramesh Ramjibhai Patel Rs.36,600 It is seen that this amount consists of three bills of Rs. 18,740 and Rs. 12,165 and Rs. 15,875 all below Rs. 20,000 and therefore the AO is directed to delete the amount as section 194C is not applicable. 7 Mukesh G Patel Rs.7,00,000 194 C is not applicable as this person is there in Loans and Advances shown in the balance sheet. The appellant has given loan / advance to him. 8 Mukesh G Patel Rs.40,340 Ledger account submitted shows bills of less than Rs. 20,000 therefore outside the purview of section 194 C. The AO is directed to delete the addition. 6. The Departmental Representative supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities and material available on record. We find that the CIT(A), while deleting t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
