9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x(A)-XXIV, New Delhi dated 23.10.2012 in Appeal No.367/11-12 for AY 2009-10. 2. The sole ground raised by the assessee reads as under:- On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 13,08,25,562/- made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act on account of lorry booking as assessee failed to deduct TDS. 3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal are that the case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee disclosed business receipts after debiting expenses under various heads and the profit was disclosed from business amounting to ₹ 13,04,885/-. The assessee explained and submitted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... conclusion that the assessee is in the business of hiring of truck simplicitor and not in the business of transporting goods which he received from the other parties. The DR contended that the findings of the Commissioner of Income Tax(A) are baseless and the matter has not been adjudicated in a proper manner while granting relief to the asessee. 5. Replying to the above, ld. counsel of the assessee submitted a copy of the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi dated 9.1.2013 in ITA no. 604/2012 in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs Hardarshan Singh. In this judgment pertaining to real brother of the assessee who is also in the same kind of business which the assessee is doing, the Hon'ble High Court held t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de to the airlines. As can be noticed, the factual position is somewhat similar to the facts of the present case. Here also, the assessee collects freight charges from the clients who intended to transport their goods through separate transporters. The entire amount collected from the clients is paid to the transporters after deducting commission from the said amount. 8. In Cargo Linkers (supra), it was contended on behalf of the assessee that the assessee was not the 'person responsible' for making payment in terms of Section 194C of the said Act. In that case, the Tribunal had also noted and found as a matter of fact that the assessee was nothing but an intermediary between the exporters and the airlines as it booked cargo for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
