9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hire charges paid to the extent of ₹ 13,96,450/- for not deducting TDS in spite of furnishing Form 15I from the transporter. (2) The ld. CIT(A) erred in charging interest u/s. 234D of the Act. 3. The assessee is a firm conducting business as transporter filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2006-07 on 27.10.2006 declaring an income of ₹ 3,55,000/-. Initially the return was processed and subsequently selected for scrutiny assessment. Assessment u/s. 143(3) was completed on 7.8.2008 with an addition of ₹ 13,96,450/- since it relates to the hire charges paid to various truck owners without deducting TDS for payment aggregating above ₹ 50,000. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee raised the plea that it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the facts of the case are identical to the facts of the case mentioned supra and therefore this case also may be remitted back to the file of the ld. Assessing Officer for such determination. 5. Ld. DR vehemently opposed to the plea of the ld. AR and argued that the ld. AO and the CIT(A) have analysed the issue thoroughly and have come to a righteous finding and the same may be upheld. Ld. DR relied on the jurisdictional High Court order in the case of J. Rama v. CIT reported in 236 CTR 105. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused over the materials produced before us. As rightly mentioned by the ld. AR, the Bangalore Tribunal in the case of Shri J. Prashant Hegde for the A.Y. 2006-07 in ITA No.665/Bang/2010 dated 21.01.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act will not apply. Accordingly, the issue is remitted back on the file of the AO with a specific direction to look into all these issues in totality as deliberated upon supra and to take appropriate action in accordance with the provisions of the Act after affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee of being heard. It is ordered accordingly. The assessee is also at liberty to furnish documents required under the amended section 194C(3) of the Act and claim benefit accordingly, if found eligible. 7. Ongoing through the facts of the case before us, we find the case before us identical to the case of Shri J. Prashant Hegde. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we are of the considered opinion that the case may be remitted back t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
