Forum
Read and express views
× Latest Case Laws on Income Tax by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals in India

These are the latest case laws decided by various Income Tax Appellate Tribunals (ITAT) of India on Income Tax which have been published recently. The case laws are open for discussion and we invite expert comments from our members on its applicability and effect on relevant issues.

10-06-2019, Ram Sharan Katta, Section 153A, 40(a)(ia), Tribunal Jaipur

  • amit
  • amit's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Administrator
  • Administrator
More
3 months 6 days ago #9729 by amit
Section - 153A, 40(a)(ia), 153C, 201
Order Date - 10-06-2019
Favouring - Assessee
Court - Tribunal Jaipur
Appellant - Ram Sharan Katta
Respondent - ITO
Justice - RAMESH C SHARMA, AM & VIJAY PAL RAO, JM
Citation - 619Taxpundit145
Appeal No. - ITA No. 725/JP/2018
Asstt. Year - 2008-09

Order

PER : R.C. SHARMA,

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld.CIT(A), 2, Udaipur dated 19-03-2018 for the A.Y. 2008-09 in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under: -

1(a) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld. AO of the searched party whose cases were covered u/s. 153A in proposing for initiating proceedings u/s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

(b) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld. AO of the assessee for initiating the proceedings u/s. 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld. AO in disallowing the following u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:-

The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by allowing the above mentioned expenses of Rs.40,87,119/-.

3. The appellant craves his rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing.”

3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. The facts of the case in brief are that search & seizure operation was carried in the cases of Siyaram Group (Katta) on 31/07/2012. During the course of which certain documents belonging to the assessee was found and seized from his residence.Consequently, the AO issued notice u/s. 153C after recording satisfaction, on 24/03/2015. Due to change of ncumbent notice u/s. 142(1) was issued by the AO on 26/10/2015 the assessee filed copy of the return filed in response to notice u/s. 153C in which total income of Rs. 5,70,870/- was declared. Same income was declared in the return filed u/s 139(1). Assessment has been completed by the AO on total income of Rs. 46,57,970/- after making disallowance of Rs. 40,87,119/-. In the assessment so framed U/s 143(3) read with Section 153A of the Act, the A.O. made following disallowances U/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act:

4. The assessee challenged the assessment having been framed U/s 153C of the Act, which was declined by the ld. CIT(A) and the addition so made was also confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), against which the assessee is in further appeal before the ITAT.

5. We have considered the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found from the record that after search the seized material have been handed over by the AO of searched party to the AO of party to whom seized material relates by proper satisfaction and initiation of action u/s 153C by the AO of the assessee referring the relevant seized material. The proceedings made as per provisions of section 153C is valid in respect of issues arising due to material found due to search and seizure and consequent enquiries. Since the claim of expenditure incurred was noticed subsequent to search, the proceedings made as per provisions of section 153C is valid in respect of issues arising due to material found due to search and seizure and consequent enquiries. We found that satisfaction so recorded U/s 153C of the Act with reference to the relevant material is suffice to dispel the doubt to initiate the proceeding U/s 153C of the Act. Accordingly, ground Nos. 1 and 2 so raised by the assessee is dismissed.

6. Now coming to the merit of addition, we found that disallowance of Rs. 28,62,582/- on account of printing and dyeing charges U/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act was declined by the A.O. by holding that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) inserted vide Finance Bill 2012 w.e.f. 01/04/2013 is not retrospective effect from 01/04/2005 because it is not declaratory and curative in nature. The A.O. observed that the CBDT vide circular No.10 dated 16.12.2013 has made it clear that these provisions are applicable for A.Y. 2013-14 and onwards.

7. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. against which the assessee is in further appeal before the ITAT.

8. We have gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that the assessee derives income from printing and dyeing. During assessment proceedings AO noticed from the audit report (form 3CD) furnished by the assessee that TDS was not deducted from the expenses of Job charges of Rs. 11,55,356/- and Printing & Dyeing charges of Rs. 28,62,582/-. It was also noticed that the assessee paid interest of Rs. 69,181/- without making TDS. When asked to show cause why these expenses be not disallowed u/s. 40(a)(ia) the

Click to view and download Full Free Judgement of Ram Sharan Katta vs. ITO

Unable to display Google Map.




Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.079 seconds

If You Appreciate What We Do Here On TaxPundit, You Should Consider:

We are thankful for your never ending support.

Latest Analysis - High Courts

PCIT vs. Sahara States Gorakhpur

PCIT vs. Sahara States Gorakhpur

PCIT vs. Sahara States Gorakhpur Read More
GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT

GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT

GENPACT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT Read More
Jugender Singh Yadav vs. PCIT

Jugender Singh Yadav vs. PCIT

Jugender Singh Yadav vs. PCIT Read More
ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs PCIT

ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs PCIT

ROHIT KUMAR GUPTA vs PCIT Read More
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41

Forum Features

Latest Case Laws
Latest Case Laws are instantly updated in the Forum into their respective section
Latest from CBDT
Latest Circulars, Notifications, Orders etc. from CBDT is updated in the Forum
Ask Experts
You can ask questions to the community
Support
Support queries are either replied via mail or in the Forum so that others can be benefited
Press Releases
Latest Press Notes and Press Releases are updated in the Forum
Connect with Members
You can connect with our community members by replying to their queries

Recommended Articles

 

SITE INFORMATION

All content herein is the copyright of Taxpundit. No images, text, or any other content may be, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of Taxpundit.

All Rights Reserved. All Content Copyright.

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest developments and special offers!

Company Master Data Since 1900. More than 1.75 Million Records. Register/Login to get FREE access. Read more
Toggle Bar