9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 987X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to him for considering the documents produced by the assessee for the first time before the CIT(A). We also find in the remand report, much of which was the view of the Assessing Officer and the scrutiny assessment was incorporated though in a different language. The Tribunal, though recorded the submissions of the assessee that they produced the details of the truck owners by giving their PAN particulars and registration numbers of the trucks, etc., when the Tribunal dismissed the appeal by the impugned order, it did not go into the said aspect, but was largely guided by the month and year, in which, the amounts were settled by the assessee i.e April 2014. This, according to the assessee, is a typographical error in the remand report and the assessee produced records to show that the payments were made in April 2012 itself. Though this mistake was pointed out by the assessee before the Tribunal by filing the miscellaneous application, the Tribunal was not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction. Thus, taking into consideration the above factual position, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer should re-examine the correctness of the details, produced by the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the taxable total income on the accepted method of accounting namely mercantile/accrued system of accounting consistently followed while recording the perverse findings of facts in para 6 of the Appellate Tribunal's order dated 30.6.2017 ? ii. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in overlooking the correct facts namely the settlement of accounts of the lorry owners in the following month namely April 2012 proving perversity in recording the findings of facts while sustaining the disallowance of claim for deduction of lorry hire charges booked in the previous year relating to the assessment year under consideration while computing the taxable total income ? And iii. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in overlooking the provisions of Section 194C(6) of the Act, which exempts the payer from making deduction of tax at source pertaining to lorry hire charges upon furnishing/on the availability of the permanent account numbers of the payee, namely the lorry owners while sustaining the disallowance of the claim for deduction of lorry hire charges despite the availability of the voluminous data including the truck numbers and perma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee was not able to substantiate the claim towards lorry expenses before the Appellate Authority despite opportunity and in spite of another opportunity before the Assessing Officer at the time when the remand report was called for. The appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) by order dated 14.3.2017. 7. Challenging the order passed by the CIT(A), the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal. It was argued before the Tribunal that the assessee produced PAN particulars of each of the lorry owners and that though the details were given, the Assessing Officer came to an erroneous conclusion that those vouchers were self made. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the findings rendered by the Assessing Officer in the remand report that the amounts were cleared by the assessee in April 2014 i.e. nearly after two years after the end of the relevant previous year and taking note of the net profit earned by the assessee, disbelieved the stand of the assessee and dismissed the appeal by order dated 30.6.2017. 8. Thereafter, the assessee filed a miscellaneous application under Section 254(2) of the Act by filing MP.No.287/Chny/2017 by pointing out tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of which was the view of the Assessing Officer and the scrutiny assessment was incorporated though in a different language. The Tribunal, though recorded the submissions of the assessee that they produced the details of the truck owners by giving their PAN particulars and registration numbers of the trucks, etc., when the Tribunal dismissed the appeal by the impugned order, it did not go into the said aspect, but was largely guided by the month and year, in which, the amounts were settled by the assessee i.e April 2014. This, according to the assessee, is a typographical error in the remand report and the assessee produced records to show that the payments were made in April 2012 itself. Though this mistake was pointed out by the assessee before the Tribunal by filing the miscellaneous application, the Tribunal was not inclined to exercise its jurisdiction. Thus, taking into consideration the above factual position, we are of the considered view that the Assessing Officer should re-examine the correctness of the details, produced by the assessee in the form of freight charges paid by them, before the CIT(A), though not in the scrutiny assessment. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITAT Jaipur in the case of ACIT Vs. Arihant Trading Co. reported in [176 ITD 397 (Jaipur-Tri)]. In the said decision it has been held that Section 194C(6) (7) are independent of each other and cannot read together to attract disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) read with Section 194C of the Act. 14. Even assuming that the assessee had not furnished the particulars as required under Sub-Section (7) of Section 194C of the Act in the prescribed form, the maximum that could be done is to impose a fine of ₹ 200/- for every day of such non compliance. Therefore, this procedural law, as prescribed under Sub-Section (7) of Section 194C of the Act cannot take away the benefit, which will accrue to the assessee under Sub-Section (7) of Section 194C of the Act. For the above reasons, we are inclined to remand the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh consideration. 15. In the result, the above tax case appeal is allowed, the orders passed by both the Tribunal dated 30.6.2017 and 16.2.2018 as well as the CIT(A) dated 14.3.2017 are set aside and the matter is remanded to the Assessing Officer to consider the details furnished by the assessee for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
