9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 664X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ightly restored the issue to the AO for examination of this factual aspect. It is pertinent to mention here that the PCIT thoroughly examined the issue and held that no deduction was required to be made in respect of payment made to railways, whereas, the issue relating to payment to private parties without deduction of TDS and corresponding declarations furnished by the respective parties, is required to be examined by the AO - No prejudice will be cause to the assessee if the AO will examine the aforesaid factual aspect and arrive at a correct conclusion. Appeal of the assessee stands dismissed. - I.T.A. No. 321/Kol/2022 - - - Dated:- 11-1-2023 - Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member And Shri Girish Agrawal, Accountant Member Shri A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they having less than 10 trucks, were not liable to be subjected to TDS deduction as per the provisions of section 194C. The ld. counsel, in this respect, relied upon to section 194C(6) which provides that no tax needs to be deducted at source, if the contractor who is in the business of plying, hiring or leasing goods carriages and such contractor does not own more than 10 goods carriages at any time during the previous year and furnishes a declaration to that effect along with his Permanent Account Number (PAN) to the person paying or crediting such sum for carriage. 4. The ld. PCIT examined the said declarations furnished by the assessee and found that the declaration was filed only in respect of two contractors namely Daria Singh and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chin Tak and in the cases of Mr. Sunil Singh and Dalbir Singh no such type of declaration submitted by the assessee during the proceedings u/s.263. The A.O. has passed the assessment order without making enquiries or verification which should have been made in the instant case. Clause (a) and (b) of Explanation-2 to Section 263(1) is attracted in this case. Accordingly, it is held that the assessment order is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Hence, in fitness of things, there is no alternative but to set aside the case to the AO, before whom the assessee is given another chance to argue his case. 5. Though, the ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that entire details were examined by the Assessing O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
