E2e SUPPLY CHAIN SOLUTIONS LTD, CHENNAI v. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-2(1), CHENNAI

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: CHENNAI ! '!# $ % BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ! ./ ITA NOS.2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 & /ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 & 2011 -12 M/S. E2E SUPPLY CHAIN SOLUTIONS LTD. 4 TH FLOOR EAST COAST CENTRE 534 ANNA SALAI TEYNAMPET CHENNAI 600 018 VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1) CHENNAI 600 034 [PAN: AABCE 7932P] ( ' /APPELLANT) ( ()' /RESPONDENT) ' * + / APPELLANT BY : MR. S. SRIDHAR ADVOCATE ()' * + /RESPONDENT BY : MS. R. ANITHA JCIT * -. /DATE OF HEARING : 25.11.2019 /0& * -. / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.11.2019 1 / O R D E R PER SHRI GEORGE MATHAN JUDICIAL MEMBER : THESE ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AG AINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF I NCOME TAX (APPEALS)-9 CHENNAI (HEREINAFTER CALLED AS CIT(A) ) IN ITA NOS.56 (2013-14) 52 (2011-12 56 (2014-15) 57 (2013-14) AND 55 (2014- ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 2 -: 15)/CIT(A)-9 DATED 27.06.2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE ARS 2008-09 2009- 10 2010-11 & 2011-12 . 2. SHRI S. SRIDHAR ADVOCATE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND MS. R. ANITHA JCIT REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE RE VENUE. 3. IN I.T.A. NO.2116/CHNY/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2008-09 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED C IT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE REPRESENTING THE CASH PAYMENTS MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS BY APPLYING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT . IN GROUND NO.3 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED C IT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF THE PAYMENT MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS ON ACCOUNT OF NON-AVAILABILITY OF THE FREIGHT VENDOR AT THE RE SPECTIVE ADDRESSES AND IN GROUND NO.4 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE REPRESENTING THE PAYMEN TS MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS BASED ON THE POSTAL REMARKS AND RESPECTIVE VERIFICATION LETTER SENT. IN GROUND NO.5 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE DISALL OWANCE BEING MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDOR ON ACCOUNT OF THEIR DENIAL OF RE CEIVING PAYMENT. GROUND NO.6 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF THE DIFFE RENCE IN THE PAYMENTS AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE CONFIRMATION RECEIV ED FROM THE FREIGHT VENDORS. GROUND NO.7 TO 16 ARE SUPPORTIVE GROUNDS. ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 3 -: 4. IN I.T.A. NO.2117/CH2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED C IT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT AS ALSO IN SUSTAINING T HE ADDITION REPRESENTING THE AMOUNTS PAID TO M/S. TWINKLE VANIJYA P. LTD. A ND M/S. SUNLIGHT AGENCY P. LTD. WHICH HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE BASIS OF A STATEMENT RECORDED FROM SHRI ABHISHEK CHOKHANI AN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OPERATOR AT KOLKATA. IN I.T.A. NO.2118/CHNY/2019 FO R THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN SUSTAINING THE DISALLOWANCE BEING THE CASH PAYMENTS MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS ON ACCOUNT OF THE APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. IN GROUND NO.3 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE REPRESENTING THE PAYMEN TS MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS ON ACCOUNT OF NON-AVAILABILITY OF THE SAID FREIGHT VENDORS. OTHER GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE GENERAL IN NATUR E. IN I.T.A. NO.2119/CHNY/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 IN GROUND NO.2 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED THE DISALLOWANCE SUSTAINED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) REPRESENTING THE CASH PAYMENTS MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS BY INVOKING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT. IN GROUND NO.3 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGED AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF THE DISALLOW ANCE REPRESENTING THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS IN VIEW OF THE NON-AVAILABILITY OF THE FREIGHT VENDORS AND IN GROUND NO.4 IN RESPECT OF T HE DENIAL BY THE FREIGHT VENDORS ON RECEIPT OF PAYMENT AND IN GROUND NO.5 ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIFFERENCE IN THE PAYMENT CONFIRMATION RECEIVED AND GROUND NOS.6 TO 14 ARE ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 4 -: GENERAL IN NATURE. IN I.T.A. NO.2120/CHNY/2019 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 IN GROUND NO.2 THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLENGE D THE ACTION OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE BEING THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS ON ACCOUNT OF THE GENUINENESS OF TH E PAYMENT CLAIMED. IN I.T.A. NO.2117/CHNY/2019 IN RESPECT OF THE REOPE NING OF THE ASSESSMENT IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORI ZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE REOPENING HAS BEEN DONE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICE R BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE STATEMENT RECORDED BY ONE SHRI ABHISHEK CHOKHAN I WHO IS CLAIMED TO BE AN ACCOMMODATION ENTRY OPERATOR. IT WAS A SUBMISSI ON THAT THE STATEMENT OF SHRI. ABHISHEK CHOKHANI WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASS ESSEE NOR WAS THE SAID SHRI. ABHISHEK CHOKHANI GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE FOR C ROSS-EXAMINATION. 5. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DREW OUR A TTENTION TO PAGES 94 TO 102 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH WAS THE COPIES OF TH E INVOICES RAISED BY M/S. SUNLIGHT AGENCY P. LTD. AT KOLKATA ALONG WITH THE LIST OF THE DETAILS OF THE GOODS CONSIGNMENT NUMBER (GSN) CHALLANS THE DATE OF LOADING VEHICLE NO. ETC. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FU RTHER DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE-103 TO 106 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH BEING THE I NVOICES RAISED BY M/S. TWINKLE VANIJYA P. LTD. ADMITTEDLY BOTH THE AGENC IES HAVE THEIR ADDRESSES IN KOLKATA. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE FUR THER DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PAGES 109 TO 111 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH IS A COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE DVS ADVISORS LLP WHEREIN THE ASSESSEE HAS SPECIFIC ALLY MENTIONED THAT THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT CANNOT BE MADE ON THE B ASIS OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED BY THE THIRD PARTIES WITHOUT FURNISHING CO PIES OF THE SAME. IT WAS A ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 5 -: SUBMISSION THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUE WA S RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR GRANTING THE ASSESSEE THE COP Y OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED FROM SHRI ABHISHEK CHOKHANI BEFORE COMPLET ION OF THE ASSESSMENT. 6. IN REPLY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E SUBMITTED THAT IT WAS FOR THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE ASSESSEE HAVING NOT PROVED THE TRANSACTION THE DECISION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AS CONFIRMED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS LIABLE TO BE UPHELD. 7. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 8. AT THE OUTSET THE REVENUE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SHOW THAT THE STATEMENT RECORDED FROM SHRI. ABHISHEK CHOKHANI HAS BEEN PROV IDED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ITS REBUTTAL. ADMITTEDLY THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE REQUIRE THAT IF ANY EVIDENCE IS GOING TO BE CONSIDERED IN AN ASSESSMENT WHICH IS AGAINST THE ASSESSEE THEN SUCH STATEMENT OR EVIDENCE MUST BE P UT TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ITS REBUTTAL. 9. IN THE PRESENT CASE THERE HAS BEEN A VIOLATION. THIS BEING SO THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE- ADJUDICATION. IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER PROPOSED TO RELY UPON THE STATEMENT OF SHRI. ABHISHEK CHOKHANI FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING T HE DISALLOWANCE THEN HE SHALL PROVIDE THE COPY OF THE STATEMENT RECORDED FR OM SHRI ABHISHEK CHOKHANI FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE ASSESSEE. IT IS ALSO RECOGNIZED THAT THE ASSESSEE ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 6 -: HAS CLAIMED THE EXPENDITURE IN RESPECT OF THE PAYME NT MADE TO M/S. TWINKLE VANIJYA P. LTD. AND M/S. SUNLIGHT AGENCY P. LTD. IT IS ALSO NOTICED FROM THE ASSESSMENT ORDER THAT NO DOCUMENTS WERE PRODUCED IN RESPECT OF THE TRANSACTIONS STATED TO HAVE BEEN MADE TO M/S. SUNLI GHT AGENCY P. LTD. THE ASSESSEE IT SEEMS HAS NOT RESPONDED TO THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER. IT IS ALSO BROUGHT ON RECORD THAT NO TDS HAS BEEN DONE IN RESPECT OF THE AMOUNTS PAID TO M/S. TWINKLE VANIJYA P. LTD. THIS BEING SO THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEALS ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER F OR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER GRANTING ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS C LAIM OF THE EXPENDITURE REPRESENTING THE PAYMENTS MADE TO M/S. TWINKLE VANI JYA P. LTD. AND M/S. SUNLIGHT AGENCY P. LTD. INCLUDING IF NECESSARY IN PRODUCING THE PERSONS RESPONSIBLE IN RESPECT OF THE TWO COMPANIES. IF TH E ASSESSING OFFICER PROPOSES TO TAKE THE BENEFIT OF THE STATEMENT RECOR DED FROM SHRI. ABHISHEK CHOKHANI FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING ADDITION THEN S UCH STATEMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE FOR ITS REBUTTAL. 10. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN I. T.A. NO.2117/CHNY/2019 IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 11. IN RESPECT OF THE OTHER FOUR APPEALS IN RESPEC T OF THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY INVOKING PROVISION OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT EACH OF THE TRANSACTIONS WITH EACH OF THE FREIGHT VENDORS WERE SEPARATE TRANSACTIONS IN R ESPECT OF EACH VEHICLE. ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 7 -: THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DREW OUR ATTE NTION TO A CHART FOR EACH OF THE ASSESSMENT YEARS WHEREIN THE VEHICLE N O THE GOODS CONSIGNMENT NO. THE CASH PAYMENT MADE REPRESENTING THE PAYMENT TO THE DRIVERS AND THE FINAL PAYMENTS TO THE FREIGHT VENDO RS WERE SHOWN. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT IN RESPECT OF THE SAID GOODS CONSIG NMENT BILLS SEPARATE TDS HAD BEEN MADE. THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATI VE DREW OUR ATTENTION TO PAGE PAGE-17 OF THE ADDITIONAL PAPER BOOK WHICH WAS A COPY OF FORM-16A REPRESENTING THE TDS IN RESPECT OF THE DIKSHA ROA D CARRIERS. PAGE-19 WAS THE COPY OF THE PAN ACCOUNT NO. PAGE-20 WAS THE COP Y OF THE GOODS CONSIGNMENT NOTE HAVING NO.15422 DATED 08.07.2008. PAGE-21 WAS THE DEBIT NOTE REPRESENTING THE CASH PAYMENTS MADE IN R ESPECT OF THE SAID GOODS CONSIGNMENT NOTE. PAGE-22 WAS THE DEBIT VOUCHER AND PAGE-23 WAS THE BILL DETAILS WHEREIN THE DATE VEHICLE NO. ITEMS WEIGHT RATE DIMENSION TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT ADVANCE AMOUNT TDS AMOUNT AND BAL ANCE DUE HAVE BEEN SPECIFICALLY SHOWN. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT EACH BILL WAS CONSIDERED AS A SEPARATE CONTRACT AND FOR EACH BILLS TDS HAS BEEN MADE AND CONSEQUENTLY IN RESPECT OF NO CONTRACT THE CASH PAYMENT REPRESENTIN G THE PAYMENTS TO THE DRIVERS EXCEEDED TO RS.20 000/-. IT WAS A SUBMISSI ON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUE WAS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR VERIFICATION AS TO WHETHER ANY OF THE PAYMENTS EXCE EDED TO RS.20 000/-. ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 8 -: 12. IN REPLY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE V EHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICE R AND THE LEARNED CIT(A). 13. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 14. ADMITTEDLY THE SAMPLE TESTING SHOWS THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS OPERATED ITS BUSINESS BY TAKING ON HIRE TRUCKS FROM VEHICLE AGGR EGATORS WHO ARE ALSO IDENTIFIED AS THE VENDOR. THE ASSESSEE IS ORGANIZI NG TRANSPORT OF MATERIAL FROM THE VARIOUS PORTS TO BARMER AND OTHER PLACES. THE GOODS CONSIGNMENT NOTE WHICH IS BASIC NOTE OF WHICH THE GOODS MOVE SHOWS T HAT THE GOODS ARE TRANSFERRED FROM CHENNAI PORT OR MUNDRA PORT ETC. TO VARIOUS LOCATIONS. THE VEHICLE NO. IS MENTIONED AND THE PRODUCT CARRIED IS ALSO MENTIONED. THE GOODS CONSIGNMENT NOTE TALLIES WITH THE DEBIT VOUCH ER IN RESPECT OF THE ADVANCE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE DRIVERS IN CASH. THE BILLS FROM THE SAID M/S. DIKSHA ROAD CARRIERS BEING THE VENDOR MORE SPECIFIC ALLY THE TRANSPORT VEHICLE AGGREGATOR SPECIFIES THE BILLS SPECIFICALLY AS ALSO THE TDS RESPECTIVELY. THUS ADMITTEDLY EACH GOODS CONSIGNMENT NOTE WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED AS SEPARATE CONTRACT AND IF THE CASH PAYMENTS IN RESPE CT OF EACH OF THE CONTRACT DOES NOT EXCEED THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT OF RS.20 000/- NO DISALLOWANCE BY INVOKING OF PROVISION OF SECTION 40A(3) CAN BE MADE . ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 9 -: 15. THE PERUSAL OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CONSOLIDATED THE PAYMENTS MADE TO EACH OF THE T RANSPORT AGGREGATORS AND AS THE SAID PAYMENTS TO THE DRIVERS REPRESENTING TH E TRANSPORT AGGREGATORS CUMULATIVELY EXCEEDS RS.20 000/- DISALLOWANCE HAS BEEN MADE. THIS IS NOT PERMISSIBLE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THE ISSUE OF DIS ALLOWANCE BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40A(3) IS RESTORED TO THE FIL E OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE SHALL LINK THE GOODS CONSIGNMENT NUMBER WITH THE INDEPENDENT TDS DEDUCTIONS TO SHOW THAT EACH OF THE SAID GOODS CONSIGNMENT NOS. ARE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTS ON WHICH TDS HAS BEEN MADE AND IF THE ASSESSEE IS ABLE TO SHOW SEPARATE INDIVI DUAL TDS DEDUCTIONS IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE GOODS CONSIGNMENT NOS. THEN THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL TREAT EACH OF THE SAID CONSIGNMENT NOTE AS A SEPARATE CONTRACT AND IF THE PAYMENT MADE IN CASH IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE SAID GOODS CONSIGNMENT NOTE IS WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED LIMIT THEN NO DISALLOWANC E BY INVOKING THE PROVISION OF SECTION 40A(3) OF THE ACT IS TO BE MADE. IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUE OF THE NON-AVAILABILITY OF THE VENDOR AT THE ADDRESSES PROVIDED AS ALSO ON ACCOUNT OF THE POSTAL REMARKS IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS PROVIDED THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF THE VARIOUS VENDORS REPRESEN TING THE TRANSPORT AGGREGATORS. THEIR PAN ACCOUNT DETAILS WERE ALSO P ROVIDED. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT NOTICE U/S.133(6) OF THE ACT HAD BE EN ISSUED TO VARIOUS VENDORS AND SOME OF THE VENDORS HAD NOT RESPONDED WHEREAS SOME OF THE VENDORS HAVE ALSO NOT RECEIVED THE NOTICES. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 10 -: CONSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THE CASH TRANSACTIONS WITH SUCH VENDORS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE CASH PO RTION OF THE TRANSACTIONS WERE BASICALLY THE TRANSACTIONS DONE BY THE ASSESSE E WHEN PAYING THE DRIVERS OF THE VEHICLE WHO WERE TRANSPORTING THE GOODS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE PAYMENTS HAVE NEVER BEEN MADE IN CASH TO THE AGGREG ATORS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE BALANCE PAYMENTS WERE ALWAYS PA ID BY CHEQUES AND TDS HAS ALSO BEEN DEDUCTED IN RESPECT OF SUCH TRANSPORT AGGREGATORS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT ON THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THE TRANSPORT AGGREGATORS WERE UNWILLING TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE DETAILS. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUE IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR EXAMINATION AS TO WHETHER THE PAN NO. PROVIDED IS GENUINE AND THAT WHETHER THE TRANSACTIONS HAVE BEEN RECORDED BY THE TRANSPORT AGGREGATORS IN THEIR ACCOUNTS AND WHETHER THE TDS BENEFIT HAS BEEN CLAIMED BY THEM. 16. IN REPLY THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE V EHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICE R AND THE LEARNED CIT(A). 17. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION AND PERUSED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 18. ADMITTEDLY IT IS A FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE PAYMENTS TO VARIOUS FREIGHT VENDORS BEING THE TRANSPORT AGGREGATORS BY CHEQUE. ADMITTEDLY TDS ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 11 -: HAS ALSO BEEN DEDUCTED. THE TDS HAS BEEN MADE IN TH E NAME OF THE VARIOUS TRANSPORT AGGREGATORS. THE PAN DETAILS OF THE AGGR EGATORS HAVE ALSO BEEN PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ADMITTEDLY ON THE BASIS OF THE NON- RESPONSE IN RESPECT OF THE NOTICES ISSUED U/S.133(6 ) OF THE ACT THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DRAWN ADVERSE INFERENCE AGAINST THE ASS ESSEE. WHEN TDS HAS BEEN MADE IN THE NAME OF THE SAID VEN DORS THEIR PAN DETAILS ARE AVAILABLE JUST BECAUSE THE SAID VENDOR S DOES NOT RESPOND TO THE NOTICES ISSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ADVERSE IN FERENCE SHOULD NOT BE DIRECTLY DRAWN AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THIS BEING SO THE ISSUES IN THESE APPEALS IN RESPECT OF NON-RESPONSE TO THE NOTICES I SSUED U/S.133(6) ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR R E-ADJUDICATION. THE ASSESSEE SHALL PROVIDE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE DETAILS OF THE PAN ACCOUNTS OF EACH OF THE SAID AGGREGATORS AS ARE REQUIRED BY THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER ALONG WITH THE DETAILS OF THE TDS DEDUCTED FOR THE RESPECTIVE YEAR S AND COPIES OF THE FORM- 16A AND THE ADDRESSES AS ARE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASS ESSEE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL INTIMATE THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE CONCERNED TRANSPORT AGGREGATORS AS WOULD BE READILY AVAILABLE FROM THE PAN NO THE DETAILS OF THE AGGREGATORS TO VERIFY AS TO THE AMOUNTS CLAIMED TO HAVE BEEN PAID BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE AGGREGATORS AND WHETHER IT IS RECOR DED IN THEIR BOOKS AND WHETHER THE TDS DONE BY THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNTS OF THOSE AGGREGATORS HAVE BEEN CLAIMED BY THEM. IF THE SAME IS FOUND TO BE INCONFORMITY NO ADDITION IS TO BE DONE IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE . IF THE SAID VERIFICATION DOES NOT TALLY WITH THE ACCOUNTS AS PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE THEN IT SHALL BE ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 12 -: ON THE ASSESSEE TO PROVE THE DETAILS OF EXPENSES AN D IN THE ABSENCE OF WHICH THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL BE AT LIBERTY TO DRAW A DVERSE INFERENCE. IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES OF THE DISALLOWANCE MADE I N RESPECT OF THE PAYMENTS MADE TO THE FREIGHT VENDORS ON ACCOUNT OF DENIAL TO HAVE RECEIVED SUCH PAYMENTS AS ALSO ON ACCOUNT OF THE DIFFERENCE IN THE CONFIRMATION PROVIDED BY THE ASSESSEE AND AS PROVIDED BY THE VEN DOR THESE ISSUES ARE ALSO RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR RE-ADJUDICATION IN LINE WITH THE ISSUE OF VERIFICATION IN RESPECT OF SUCH VENDOR S WHO HAVE NOT RESPONDED TO THE NOTICES ISSUED U/S.133(6) OF THE ACT. WITH THE SE DIRECTIONS THE ISSUES IN THESE APPEALS ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER FOR RE- ADJUDICATION. 19. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN I.T.A. NO.2116/CHNY/2019 I.T.A. NO.2118/CHNY/2019 I.T.A. NO.2119/CHNY/2019 AND I.T.A. NO.2120 ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25 TH NOVEMBER 2019 IN CHENNAI. ( '!# $ ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) . /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI 2! /DATED: 25 TH NOVEMBER 2019 . IA SR. P.S 1 * (-34 54&- /COPY TO: 1. ' /APPELLANT 2. ()' /RESPONDENT 3. 6- ( )/CIT(A) 4. ITA NOS. 2116 2117 & 2118 2119 2120/CHNY/2019 :- 13 -: 6- /CIT 5. 4 78 (- /DR 6. 89 : /GF