9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing officer has rightly reopened the assessment by issuing notice u/s 148 on the basis of the information received. Hence, this Tribunal do not find any infirmity in the order of the lower authority. Disallowance of difference of amount received from Geep Batteries India Pvt Ltd. - Held that:- The only claim of the assessee before this Tribunal is that certain receipts pertaining to earlier year was not accounted in the books of account. The fact remains is that the assessee has received ₹ 18,970 during the year under consideration. To this extent, the AIR information available before the assessing officer can be considered. The assessee could not explain why the amount received during the year under consideration should be tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the amounts. Therefore, the claim of the assessee that due to lapse of time they could not collect form 15-I is not justified. Unless and until it is shown to the satisfaction of the assessing officer that the amounts in the hands of the recipients are not taxable, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the assessee is liable to deduct tax. Therefore, failure to deduct tax would attract disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Hence, the CIT(A) has rightly restricted the disallowance to the extent of ₹ 60,74,224. This Tribunal do not find any infirmity in the order of the lower authority. Accordingly, the same is confirmed. - Decided against revenue. - I.T.A No. 251/Coch/2014, I.T.A No. 262/Coch/2014 - - - Dated:- 30-10-201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irmity in the order of the lower authority. 5. The next ground of appeal is with regard to disallowance of ₹ 18,970 being the difference of amount received from Geep Batteries India Pvt Ltd. Shri TM Sreedharan, the ld.senior counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee accounted total freight receipt to the extent of ₹ 1,40,197. As per the AIR information, the assessing officer claims that the assessee has received ₹ 1,59,167. Therefore, the difference of ₹ 18,970 was added as unaccounted receipt. According to the ld.senior counsel the assessing officer made addition purely on the AIR information without ascertaining the actual receipt of money by the assessee. According to the ld.senior counsel, some of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able before the assessing officer can be considered. The assessee could not explain why the amount received during the year under consideration should be taken as receipt in the next accounting year. In the absence of any such explanation, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the addition of ₹ 18,970. This Tribunal do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). Accordingly, the same is confirmed. 8. The next ground of appeal is with regard to addition of ₹ 8,010. This addition was made in respect of difference of the amount received and the AIR information from Acme Chemicals Pvt Ltd. As in the case of Geep Batteries India Pvt Ltd, the ld.senior counsel for the assessee cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see has filed form 15-I to the extent of ₹ 28,28,38,187. According to the ld.senior counsel, this amounts to about 2% of the total claim of the assessee. The ld.senior counsel submitted that the assessee has almost 300 branches across the country. Therefore, the assessee could not get form 15-I due to lapse of time. According to the ld.senior counsel, merely because the assessee could not file 15-I in respect of ₹ 60,74,224, there cannot be any disallowance. Referring to the departmental appeal, the ld.senior counsel submitted that the department filed the appeal in respect of disallowance deleted by the CIT(A) to the extent of ₹ 28,28,12,411. According to the ld.senior counsel, the assessee has filed form 15J / 15I. There ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, it is for the revenue to show that the amount to the extent of ₹ 28,28,38,187 is liable for taxation and hence the assessee is liable to deduct tax. When the assessee received from 15-I / 15-J from the recipient saying that their taxable income is below the taxable limit, then the liability to deduct tax would not arise. Therefore, to that extent the assessee is justified in not deducting tax. It is for the Commissioner before whom form 15-I / 15J was filed to verify the same and inform the assessee that the claim made in form 15-I or 15-J is not correct. Simply receiving the form 15-I and 15-J and keeping the same on file without acting upon, the assessing officer cannot blame the assessee for non deduction of tax. Therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
