9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 1057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 28-04-2009 at total income of ₹ 6,80,460/-. Subsequently, this assessment was reopened u/s.148 by issuing notice on 22-03-2011. Thereafter, AO framed the assessment u/s.143(3), r.w.s. 147 of the I. T. Act on 19-10-2011at total income of ₹ 2,17,24,703/- as under:- Rs. Total income as per order u/s. 143(3) dt. 28/04/2009 6,80,460/- Less: Lump sum disallowance made out of labour expenses in the assessment order dt.28/04/09 50,279/- 6,30,460/- Add: 1)Addition u/s.40(a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d not be deducted at source. In the instant case, the payments were made to labourers through Mukadam which is evident from the ledger account of labour expenses and single payment does not exceed ₹ 20,000/-. Moreover, the provisions of S.40(a)(ia) are not applicable if the payment of expenditure has already been made or the expenditure is not outstanding at the end of the financial year. Reliance can also be placed on the decision in the case of Merilyne Shipping Transport v. ACIT (2012) 136 ITS 23 (Vishakhapatnam (SB) / 20 Taxman 244. Therefore, in view of the facts and circumstances of the appellant s case and the legal position in the cases of Laxmi Protein Products P. Ltd. (supra) Merilyne Shipping Transport (supra) the dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e representative of the labour is in fact not an independent contractor but he is representative the assessee and since individual payment never exceeded ₹ 20,000/-, the tax was not deducted at source. In support of this, he pointed out that the ld. CIT (A) followed the judgment of ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Laxmi Protein Products Pvt. Ltd. (2010) 3 ITR 768. The second reason given by ld. CIT (A) is reliance on the Special Bench of Vishakhapatnam decision in the case of Merilyne Shipping Transport (sutra). The ld. DR fairly conceded that the view taken by Special Bench in this decision is not more good in law in view of the judgment of our Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Sikandarkhan N. Tunvar (supr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
