ITO, Ward 3(2), Nanded v. Shri Shekhar Dattatraya Pawar,, Nanded

ITA 348/PUN/2013 | 2008-2009
Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2013 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 34824514 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AMXPP6222C
Bench Pune
Appeal Number ITA 348/PUN/2013
Duration Of Justice 8 month(s) 23 day(s)
Appellant ITO, Ward 3(2), Nanded
Respondent Shri Shekhar Dattatraya Pawar,, Nanded
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-10-2013
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 28-10-2013
Assessment Year 2008-2009
Appeal Filed On 04-02-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A PUNE BEFORE: SHRI G. S. PANNU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 348 /PN/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008 - 09 ITO WARD - 3(2) NANDED VS. SHRI SHEK HAR DATTATRAYA PAWAR BAPU NIWAS DHARAMBAD DIST. - NANDED (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. AMXPP6222C APPELLANT BY: SHRI P.L. PATHADE RESPONDENT BY: N O N E DATE OF HEARING : 2 1 - 10 - 2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 - 10 - 2013 ORDER P ER R.S . PADVEKAR JM : - IN THIS APPEAL THE REVENUE HAS CHALLENGED THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AURANGABAD DATED 22 - 11 - 2012 FOR THE A.Y. 2008 - 09. THE REVENUE HAS TAKEN THE FOLLOWING TWO GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.61 18 276/ - MADE U/S. 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT ON ACCOUNT OF NON DEDUCTION OF TAX ON PAYMENT TO TRANSPORTERS. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT ON THE BASIS OF LEDGER ACCOUNTS OF THE PARTIES AVAILABLE ON RECORD IT IS EVIDENT THAT THE GOODS WERE TRANSPORTED CONTINUOUSLY THROUGH OUT THE YEAR AND THEREFORE ALL GRS RELATED TO ONE PARTY SHOULD BE AGGREGAT E D FOR THE PURPOSE OF TDS. 2. THE SHORT I SSUE IN CONTROVERSY IS WHETHER THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED AND DISALLOWING RS.61 18 276/ - BY INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 40A(IA) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT FOR ALLEGEDLY NON - DEDUCTING THE TAX AT SOURCE. 2 ITA NO. 348/PN/2013 SHRI SHEKHAR DATTATRAYA PAWAR NANDED 3. THE FACTS WHICH ARE REVEALED FROM THE RE CORD AS UNDER. THE ASSESSEE IS A PROPRIETOR OF M/S. SHRI DATTAKRUPA TRANSPORT. THE ASSESSEE IS A TRANSPORT SERVICE PROVIDER. HE HAS ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH HIS CLIENTS TO PROVIDE TRANSPORT ATION SERVI CES TO TRANSPORT THEIR MATERIAL TO VARIOUS POIN TS AS PER THEIR DIRECTIONS . F OR CARRYING OUT CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION HE HAS USED HIS OWN VEHICLES AND ALSO ENGAGED THE TRUCKS BELONGING TO VARIOUS PARTIES TO WHOM HE HAS MADE PAYMENT OF TRANSPORT ATION CHARGES ON DIFFERENT DATES AGGREGATING TO RS.61 18 276 / - . THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER EX - PARTE U/S. 144 OF THE ACT IN WHICH HE HAS NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE PAYMENT OF RS.61 18 276 / - TOWARDS THE TRANSPORT CHARGES BUT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEDUCTED THE TAX AT SOURCE AND HENCE THE ENTIRE AMOUNT WAS LIABLE TO BE DISALLOWED U/S. 40A(IA) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE THE ADDITION TO THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF THE ENTIRE TRANSPORT ATION CHARGES PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED TH E SAID ADDITION BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE LD. CIT(A) DELETED THE SAID ADDITION BY GIVING THE FINDING ON MERIT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ENTERED INTO ANY CONTRACT WITH THE TRUCK OWNERS WHOSE TRUCKS WERE HIRED AS AND WHEN REQUIRED . T HE CHARGES OF EACH TRI P IS NOT EXCEEDING RS. 20 000/ - . THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO REFERRED TO THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 715 AND HELD THAT EACH TRIP BY HIRING A TRUCK FOR SPECIFIC CHARGES DETERMINED SEPARATELY IS TO BE RE GARDED AS A SEPARATE CONTRACT AND CANNOT BE AGGREGATED FOR THE PURPO SE OF APPLICABILITY OF THE TDS PROVISIONS. THE LD. CIT(A) FOLLOWED THE FOLLOWING DECISIONS: (I) CIT VS. UNITED RICE LAND LTD. 322 ITR 594 (P & H). (II) MY THRI TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. ACIT (2009) 1 ITR 290 (V ISAKHA - TRIBUNAL). (III) CITY TRANSPORT CORPORA TION VS. ITO (2007) 13 SOT 479 (MUM. - TRIBUNAL). 3 ITA NO. 348/PN/2013 SHRI SHEKHAR DATTATRAYA PAWAR NANDED 4. AS PER THE CIRCULAR NO. 715 IN THE CASE OF PAYMENT S OF TRANSPORTER S EACH GR CAN BE SAID TO BE A SEPARATE CONTRACT IF THE GOODS ARE TRANSPORTED AT ONE TIME . B UT WHAT IS NECESSARY IS THAT THERE SHOULD BE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE PARTIES FOR SPECIFIC PERIOD O R FOR SPECIFIED QUANTITY. NOTHING HAS BEEN BROUGHT ON RECORD EVEN BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO S HOW THAT THERE WAS CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THE TRANSPORTERS FOR SPECIFIC PERIOD OR QUANTITY. T HE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS ALSO NOT GIVEN ANY CATEGORICAL FINDING ON THE FACTUAL ASPECT WHETHER THERE WAS SPECIFIC CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ASSESSEE AND THOSE 8 PARTIES TO WHOM THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE PAYMENTS FOR USING THEIR TRUCKS. IN OUR OPINION NO INTERF ERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). WE ACCORDINGLY CONFIRM THE SAME AND DISMISS THE GROUNDS TAKEN BY THE REVENUE. 5 . IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 - 10 - 2013 SD/ - SD/ - ( G.S. PANNU ) ( R.S. PADVEKAR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER RK /PS PUNE DATED : 28 TH OCTOBER 20 1 3 COPY TO 1 ASSESSEE 2 DEPARTMENT 3 THE CIT(A) AURANGABAD 4 THE CIT AURANGABAD 5 THE DR ITAT A BENCH PUNE . 6 GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE