9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1457X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spect of their PAN to the person paying or crediting to such contractors TDS need not be deducted. In the case in hand we can see from the assessment order that the assessee has provided details of PAN only in respect of nine contractors amounting to ₹ 67,24,412/- and no details have been furnished in respect of balance amount of ₹ 12,99,559/-. Even if we say that the assessee has complied with provisions of Section 194C(6) it is only to the extent of ₹ 67,24,412/-. Therefore, since the assessee has not furnished the details of PAN in respect of other contractors, the assessee has not complied with the provisions of Section 194C(6) at least to the tune of ₹ 12,99,559/-. Therefore, in our view the said amount is l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions 194(6) and 194(7) of the Act and both these provisions are cumulative nature. Since the assessee failed to furnish information regarding payment made to transporters without deduction of tax in prescribed form with the prescribed authority, he was of the opinion that the assessee did not fulfil the conditions specified in section 194C(7) of the Act. The AO also observed that the applicability of provisions of Section 194C(6) for non deduction is not complete without the fulfilling of the conditions laid down under Section 194C(7) of the Actg. Therefore he was of the opinion that both these provisions are cumulative. 4. On appeal the learned CIT(A), following the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ghosh vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1420/Kol/2015 dated 09.09.2016 and the decision of the Nagpur Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Manikgarh Cement in ITA Nos. 316 to 319/Nag/2015 dated 23.11.2016 in support of the above contentions. 6. The learned D.R., on the other hand, vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the authorities below. The AO in the course of assessment proceedings requested the assessee to furnish the reasons why no TDS was deducted in respect of transportation charges. The assessee furnished PAN details of the transporters to the tune of ₹ 67,24,412/- out of ₹ 80,23,971/- in respect of nine transporters referred to in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Section 194C(6) of the Act submission of Permanent Account Number which enable the payer from no deduction of TDS. The finding of the AO was that the Permanent Account Numbers furnished cannot be accepted as it was not filed with the appropriate authority as required u/s. 194C(7) of the Act and whether such failure attracts and invokes the jurisdiction under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. At this juncture, we may refer the order of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal which held that provisions of section 194C(6) and section 194C(7) are independent to each other and can join together not be read together to attract the disallowance U/Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The relevant portion of which is reproduced hereunder: v) Sections 194C(6) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rusal of the assessment order we find that the assessee made payments to transport contractors amounting to ₹ 80,23,971/- whereas the assessee has provided the details and PAN only in respect of nine transporters to the tune of ₹ 67,24,412/- during the course of assessment proceedings. As per provisions of Section 194C(6) if the transport contractors furnish the details in respect of their PAN to the person paying or crediting to such contractors TDS need not be deducted. In the case in hand we can see from the assessment order that the assessee has provided details of PAN only in respect of nine contractors amounting to ₹ 67,24,412/- and no details have been furnished in respect of balance amount of ₹ 12,99,559/-. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
