9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 358X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese factual information and passed a reasoned order. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) and uphold the same and dismiss the grounds of appeal of the revenue. - Shri Br Baskaran, Accountant Member And Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri. Sanjay R. Parikh.AR ORDER PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM: The appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi / CIT(A) passed u/sec 250 of the Act. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. (a) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,46,07,278/- without appreciating the fact that the case of the assessee for the AY 2014-15 was reopened considering the fact that the assessee has not deducted the TDS on the payment of Rs. 2,46,07,278/- made to its related party i.c. M/s. Capricorn Logistics Pvt. Ltd. 2 (b) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2.46,07,278/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee failed to furnish the basic details as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny under CASS to verify Large other expenses claimed in the profit Loss account, receipts u/s 194C and 194J (as per 26AS) are more than the receipts shown in ITR, tax credit (and receipts) in ITR is less than tax credit in 26AS, mismatch in sales turnover reported in audit report and ITR. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer (AO) has issued notice u/sec 143(2) and u/sec 142(1) of the Act. In response the notice, the Ld. AR of the assessee appeared from time to time and submitted the details and explained the working pattern/ methodology of the assessee. The AO dealt on the facts and the modus operandi of the customs clearance charges on imports and exports. On perusal of financial statements, the found that the assessee has debited/claimed Custom Clarence Charges of Rs 4,11,17,242/- in the Profit Loss account and majority of these expenses are incurred in cash and self made vouchers and a show cause notice was issued. The assessee has filed the explanations and details vide letter dated 15.12.2016 referred at Para 4 of the order. Whereas the A.O was not satisfied with the explanations as most of the cash expenses are by self made vouchers and has disallowed @6% of the cash expenses w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowed the assessee appeal. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)order, the revenue has filed an appeal before the Hon ble Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, the Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition overlooking the findings of the Assessing officer that the assessee could not substantiate with the documentation and information on the Agency services and the Ld.DR relied on the AO order and prayed for allowing the revenue appeal. Per Contra, the Ld. AR supported the order of the CIT(A) and substantiated the submissions with the paper book. 6. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The sole disputed issue envisaged by the Ld.DR that the CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition overlooking the findings of the Assessing Officer that the assessee has not deducted the TDS on payments pertaining to the Agency services. Further the A.O has relied on the Tax Audit report clause 23 with respect to the payments made without deduction of TDS. Whereas the Ld.AR submitted that the relevant clause 23 of the Form.No.3CD pertains to reporting of particulars of payment made to specified persons u/sec 40A(2)(b) of the Act and demonstrated the Form.No.3C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case was reopened u/s 147 of the I T. Act. The Return was filed in response to the said notice on 23.04.2021. The reasons for re-opening were provided on 10.12.2021 and the objection was filed by letter dated 02.02.2022. The said objections were not disposed-off by speaking order. Thereafter, show cause notice was received on 27.03.2022 proposing to make the addition of the above agency charges. The Appellant made detailed submissions on 28.03.2022 and also opted for video conference which was held on 29.03.2022. The appellant submitted that the objections raised against the reasons for re-opening were not disposed off by speaking order as required by the order of Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts ( India) Ltd. Appeal No. 7731 of 2002. Therefore, the appellant submits that the Assessment Order passed is null and void as it has not followed the guidelines of the Supreme Court. The appellant further submitted that clause no.-23 of Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB of the I.T. Act is relating to payments made to relative parties u/s 40A(2)(b) but the A.O. wrongly considered this clause no. 23 being payment of without deduction of TDS. In support of the same, the appellant submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port which is not relevant clause for TDS deduction. The relevant clause of noncompliance of TDS reporting is 21(B) (ii) of Tax Audit Report. In the said clause under the head non-compliance details, the name of Capricorn Logistics Pvt. Ltd. is not reported. In view of the above observation and facts and circumstances, the appellant deserves to succeed and the addition made by the A.O. is deleted. The appellant gets the relief of Rs. 2,46,07,278/-. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED. 7. We find the CIT(A) has dealt on the facts, provisions of Act, submissions of the assessee and the clause 23 of the Tax Audit Report Form. No 3CD to clear the wrong observations of the Assessing Officer. Further the said clause relate to reporting of particulars of payments made to specified persons u/sec 40A(2)(b) of the Act and the assessee has reported the payments made to one of the partner M/s Capricon logistics Pvt Lt in the F.Y.2013-14. The CIT(A) has considered these factual information and passed a reasoned order. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) and uphold the same and dismiss the grounds of appeal of the revenue. 8. In the result, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
