Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Sureshbhai G.Patel, Ahmedabad vs Department Of Income Tax

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal19 March 2015

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

The Tribunal deleted a disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 where the assessee had deposited the tax deducted at source on sub-contract labour payments in the Government account before the due date for filing the return of income; the disallowance could not stand on that footing. Where the first appellate authority has found as a fact that the tax deducted at source was deposited in the Government account before the due date of filing the return of income, and the Revenue has placed no material on record contradicting that finding, the appellate tribunal will not interfere with that factual finding.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

आयकर अपीलय अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ 'ए', अहमदाबाद ।IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL" A " BENCH, AHMEDABADसम ी जी.डी.अ वाल, उपा य एवं ी कुल भारत, या यक सद य ।BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGARWAL,VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) AndSHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER

आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1967/Ahd/2011 ( नधा रण वष / Assessment Year : 2008-09) ITO बनाम/ Shri Suresh Gandalal Patel Ward-9(1) Vs. Nalkunj Society Ahmedabad Camp Road, Shahibaug Ahmedabad थायी ले खा सं . /जीआइआर सं . / PAN/GIR No. : ABCPP 1758 M (अपीलाथ% /Appellant) .. (&'यथ% / Respondent)

अपीलाथ% ओर से /Appellant by : Shri Santosh Karnani, Sr.DR &'यथ% क) ओर से/Respondent by : Shri V.P. Patel, AR

ु वाई क) तार,ख / सन Date of Hearing 24/02/2015 घोषणा क) तार,ख /Date of Pronounce ment 19/03/2015

आदे श / O R D E R

PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER :

This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad ('CIT(A)' in short) dated 15/06/2011 pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:-

1. The ld.Commissioner of Income-tax(A)-XV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs.23,23,449/-

made by the Assessing Officer u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act.

ITA No.1967/Ahd/2011 ITO vs. Shri Suresh Gandalal Patel Asst.Year - 2008-09 -2-

2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer.

3. It is therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld.Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad may be set-aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored.

2. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") was framed vide order dated 10/12/2010, thereby the Assessing Officer (AO in short) made various additions on account of disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act amounting to Rs.23,23,449/-, disallowance of expenditure on foreign travel amounting to Rs.2,47,593/- and addition made on account of deposits received from four persons amounting to Rs.94,000/- by invoking provisions of section 68 of the Act. Against this, the assessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, allowed the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), now the Revenue is in appeal before us.

3. The only effective ground in this appeal is against the deletion of disallowance of Rs.23,23,449/- made by the AO by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.

4. The ld.Sr.DR supported the order of the ld.AO, whereas the ld.counsel for the assessee supported the order of the ld.CIT(A). The ITA No.1967/Ahd/2011 ITO vs. Shri Suresh Gandalal Patel Asst.Year - 2008-09 -3-

ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has given a finding on fact that the tax was deposited in the Government account before the due date.

5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld.CIT(A) in para-6 of his order has given a finding on fact that TDS on sub-contract labour payments of Rs.23,23,449/- was deposited in government account on 31/05/2008. In this regard, during the course of hearing, a photocopy of the Challan was placed on record. Since the Revenue has not placed any contrary material on record suggesting that the TDS was not deposited in Government account before due date of filing of Income Tax Return by the assessee, therefore we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A), same is hereby upheld. Thus, ground raised by the Revenue is rejected.

6. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Court on Thursday, the 19th day of March, 2015 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/-

(जी.डी.अ वाल) (कुल भारत) उपा य या यक सद य ( G.D. AGARWAL ) ( KUL BHARAT ) VICE PRESIDENT (AZ) JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad; Dated 19/ 03 /2015 ट,.सी.नायर, व. न.स./T.C. NAIR, Sr. PS ITA No.1967/Ahd/2011 ITO vs. Shri Suresh Gandalal Patel Asst.Year - 2008-09 -4-

आदे श क! " त$ल%प अ&े%षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलाथ% / The Appellant

2. &'यथ% / The Respondent.

3. संबं6धत आयकर आयु8त / Concerned CIT

4. आयकर आयु8त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-XV, Ahmedabad

5. 9वभागीय & त न6ध, आयकर अपील,य अ6धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad

6. गाड< फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शानुसार/ BY ORDER,

स'या9पत & त //True Copy//

उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, अहमदाबाद / ITAT, Ahmedabad

1. Date of dictation .. 16.3.15 (dictation-pad 4- pages attached at the end of this File)

2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member ..16.3.15

3. Other Member...

4. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr.P.S./P.S.................

5. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for pronouncement......

6. Date on which the fair order comes back to the Sr.P.S./P.S.......19.3.15

7. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk.....................19.3.15

8. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk..........................................

9. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order..........................

10. Date of Despatch of the Order..................

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free