TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It was held that when form no.15-I had been obtained from the sub-contractor whose contents were not disputed or whose genuineness was not doubted then the assessee is not liable to deduct tax from the payment made to sub-contractor. Once, the assessee is not liable to deduct tax u/s.194C then the addition u/s. 40(a)(ia) cannot be made - in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 1355/Ahd/2010 - - - Dated:- 12-10-2012 - Shri G.C.Gupta, And Shri T.R. Meena, JJ. By Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate with Shri Jaimin Gandhi, A.R. By Respondent Shri C. S. Anjaria, Sr. D.R. O R D E R PER : T.R. Meena, Accountant Member This is an appeal at the behest of the Assessee which has emanated from the order of CIT(A)-II, Barod ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e A.O. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A)-II, Baroda, who has dismissed the appeal and the operative portion of the order is reproduced as under: 2.3 I have considered the submissions of the Authorized Representative and the order of the Assessing Officer. Ongoing through the details of the amount paid/credited into the amount as freight expenses, it is noted that Rs.29,98,244/- has been paid to the immediate family of the appellant. Shri Sukhvinder Singh received Rs.4,54,757/-, Shri Gurvinder Singh Rs.3,05,314/-, Smt. Amarjeet Kaur wife of the appellant received Rs.22,38,173/-. Payments were made to Shri Prem Singh of Rs.7,75,388/- to Shri Baldev Singh of Rs.99,444/- and Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant had filed 15-J form before the Commissioner of Income-tax, there was an inordinate delay of two years and eight months in furnishing of 15-J form before the CIT. Therefore, he requested to delete the addition by following above cited decision. In fact, the appellant had filed the form no.15-J on 21.04.2006. Form the side of the Revenue, Shri C.S. Anjaria, ld. Sr. D.R. vhehemently relied upon the orders of the CIT(A) and A.O. and contended that as per CIT-II, Baroda, record, there was no 15-J form was available whereas the assessee s jurisdiction to file the 15-J form, was with CIT-I, Baroda. Therefore, the appellant has not made compliance of Section 194C of the IT Act. Therefore, he prayed to confirm the order of the CIT(A). 5. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prescribed; (5) declaration as per second proviso to clause (i) of sub-section (3) of section 194C is form No.15-I; (6) the particulars referred to in 3rd proviso would be in form No.15J; (7) form No.15J shall be furnished to the Commissioner of Income-tax so designated by the Chief Commissioner of Income-tax. (8) it shall be furnished on or before 30th June following the FY. Further, the Co-ordinate Bench held that all the provisos of sub-section 3 under clause (i) of 194C is to be fulfilled by the assessee i.e. the appellant has to obtain 15-I form from the sub-contractor while making the payments to them, form no.15-J is to file before the concern Commissioner on or before 30th June of following financial year and payment above ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
