9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 1139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r AY 2009-10. 2. Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate and Shri Pranabesh Sarkar, Advocate appeared on behalf of the assessee and Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, JCIT appeared on behalf of the revenue. 3. It was submitted by the Ld. AR that this is a second round of litigation. It was a submission that two issues are involved - one is a disallowance made in respect of the payments made to the suppliers of material in the assessee's contract business by applying the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act to an extent of Rs. 52,61,916/-. The second issue was against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) in respect of the non-deduction of TDS on the payment made to the Mangla P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee. It was the argument of the Ld. AR in respect of the disallowance u/s. 40A(3) that the payments have been made by bearer cheques to various individuals for supply of material and the necessary certificates from the Mukhias of the relevant Gram Panchayat had also been produced before the Assessing Officer in the course of the original proceedings itself wherein it has been categorically admitted that there is no branch of any bank in the village where the suppliers were operating. Copy of one of the certificates issued reads as follows: 6. It was a submission that in view of the provisions of Rule 6DDJ as there was no bank account in the relevant village, the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act could not be applied on the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Such Mukhias have specifically confirmed that there are no banks or any branch of banks operating in the respective villages. Thus, obviously, the provisions of Rule 6DDJ would come into play and no disallowance can be made in respect of the payment made by bearer cheques to the various suppliers of material. This being so, the addition as made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) to the extent of Rs. 52,62,916/- stands deleted. 9. In respect of the addition made by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, it was submitted by the ld. AR that in view of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindusthan Coca Cola Beverage (P) Ltd. reported in 163 Taxman 355 (SC) the issue c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
