TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 520X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AND HARYANA HIGH COURT ] - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 821 of 2010 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 25-1-2016 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MRS. RAJ RAHUL GARG, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate For The Respondent : None Ajay Kumar Mittal,J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act ) against the order dated 24.2.2010, Annexure A.III passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench 'B', Chandigarh (for brevity, the Tribunal ) in ITA No.761/CHD/2009 for the assessment year 2006-07 claiming following substantial question of law:- i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,19,255/- as transportation charges. As per TDS certificates, the contractual receipts from various government agencies were shown at ₹ 84,92,855/-. According to the Assessing Officer, these payments were covered under Section 194C of the Act. Out of this payment, the assessee further debited ₹ 78,77,384/- as transportation expenses. Payment of ₹ 79,77,384/- was made to 174 transporters involved in the work carried out by the assessee. The Assessing Officer considered the payments made by the assessee to the truck operators as sub contractual payments and thus provisions of Section 194C of the Act were held to be applicable. It was pleaded before the Assessing Officer that all the truck operators owned not more than two t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s deducted at source by the assessee as required under Section 194C of the Act. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)], who vide order dated 11.5.2009, Annexure A.II allowed the appeal holding that provisions of section 194C of the Act were not applicable to the payments made by the assessee to the truck operators and deleted the disallowance of ₹ 63,10,197/- made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Dissatisfied with the order passed by the CIT(A), the revenue filed appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 24.2.2010, Annexure A.III, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal and confirmed the order passed by the CIT(A). Hence the instant appeal by the revenue. 3. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
