9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th For the Respondent : V.K. Singh ORDER 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 29th August, 2016, passed by the learned CIT(A), in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. Grievances raised by the appellant are as follows :- 1) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not properly appreciating and considering various submissions, evidences and supporting placed on record during the course of the assessment proceedings, and not properly appreciating various facts and law in their proper perspective. 2) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot acceptable for the reason that as per the provisions of subsection (7) to Section 194C of the Act the assessee was required to furnish to the prescribed authority such particulars within such time. There is no dispute that the assessee has not furnished the said details to the prescribed authority within the time allowed by the Statute. 4. Aggrieved, assessee carried the matter in appeal before the learned CIT(A) but without success. In a very elaborate order, learned CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer by observing as follows :- 4.3 Decision: I have carefully considered the facts of the case, the assessment order and the written submission of the appellant. The AO has made the disallowance in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provided u/s.194C(6). 4.6 having considered the facts and submission of the appellant, that it has made the payments to the parties towards the freight and transportation expenses and the appellant s claim that it has obtained the PAN from the parties, but did not mention it in Form No.26Q is not supported with any documents. The appellant s contention that it has obtained the PAN from the party before filing of the original TDS return in Form No.26Q is found not correct from the very fact that when the appellant was having its PAN, then what prevented him from quoting such PAN in the original TDS return filed. The appellant did not have any reason for such an act of default. As per the provisions of section 194C, the appellant ough ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of section 194(7), the appellant was to submit the PAN particulars in the TDS return filed originally in Form No.26Q within the time limit prescribed u/s. 200 (3) r.w. Rule 31A, whereby the due dates of furnishing the TDS returns are specified. Thus, the time limit for furnishing TDS return in Form No.26Q was 15th July for first quarter, 15th Oct. for second quarter, 15th January or 3rd Quarter and 15th May of the immediately following financial year for the last quarter. Thus, the appellant ought to have submitted the PAN in the form no.26Q filed by the appellant as per the aforesaid due dates. Since, the appellant has not complied the specific provisions of section 194(7) of the I.T. Act, 1961, whereby the time limit for submitting such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. While in the appellant s case, which is in respect of A.Y. 2012-13, the provisions of section 194(7) are very much applicable. 4.11 In view of the aforesaid discussion, it apparent that the AO was perfectly in order for invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act, as the appellant has failed to comply with the provisions of section 194C(6) 194C(7) of the I.T. Act, 1961, and therefore, the disallowance made by the AO of ₹ 3,29,400/- is found correct and justified and hence, confirmed. The ground of appeal is accordingly dismissed. 5. The assessee is not satisfied and is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 6. I have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of Section 194C(6), no disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act is permissible, even there is violation of the provisions of Section 194C(7) of the Act. 8. Respectfully following the aforesaid binding judicial precedent, I uphold the plea of the assessee and delete the impugned disallowance of ₹ 3,29,400/-, as it is not even in dispute that when we read section 194C(6) independently, and not in conjunction with section 194C(7), there is no default in tax withholding obligations leading to disallowance under section 40(a)(ia). The disallowance of ₹ 3,29,400/- thus stands deleted. 9. In the result, the appeal is allowed. Pronounced in the open court today on the 11th September, 2018. - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
