TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 651X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these purchases in their books of account and have paid due taxes while filing of return of income, has not been examined either by the Assessing Officer or by the ld. CIT(A). Matter remanded back. - Decided in favor of assessee for statistical purposes. - ITA No. 946/JP/2017 - - - Dated:- 7-8-2018 - SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM For The Assessee : Shri Nikhlesh Kataria (CA) For The Revenue : Shri Rajendra Jha (JCIT) ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 05/09/2017 of ld. CIT (A), Kota arising from the order passed U/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) for the A.Y. 2009-10. The assessee has r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e dismissed being not pressed., 3. Ground No. 4 of the appeal is regarding treating the assessee as assessee in default without considering the contention of the assessee that the other party has considered the said amount while computing the income and filed the return U/s 139 of the Act. The assessee is a scrap dealer and engaged in the business of trading in scrap. During the year under consideration, the assessee sold scrap to the tune of ₹ 1,57,86,754/- to various scrap dealers. The Assessing Officer was of the view that as per the provisions of Section 206C(1) of the Act, the assessee was under obligation to collect TCS on sale made to scrap dealers. The Assessing Officer accordingly passed order U/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g retrospective effect. He has relied upon the decision of Special Bench of Rajkot Tribunal in the case of Bharti Auto Products Vs CIT (2013) 145 ITD 0001 as well as decision of Hon ble Delhi Benches of Tribunal in the case of Divisional Forest Officer Vs ITO 57 taxman.com 238 (Delhi). Thus, the ld AR has submitted that despite a specific issue raised by the assessee, the ld CIT(A) has failed to adjudicate the same. He has pointed out that the ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Chandmal Sancheti Vs ITO (2016) 160 ITD 0313. However, even in the said decision, the relief was granted to the extent of the amount which was considered by the purchasing party while computing the income and paid due tax by followin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Thus, in view of the opinion of the Jurisdictional ITAT, and the facts involved, I am of the opinion that the appellant was liable for deduction of the Tax at Source from the buyers to whom he sold the scrap worth ₹ 1,64,18,624/-/-. The liability of a seller to collect tax at source in terms of section 206C is absolute unless requisite declaration from the buyer is obtained and a copy thereof is delivered to the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner in terms of the provisions of sub-section (1A) and (1B) of Section 206C. The default in doing so and non filing of Form No. 27 made him liable for the TCS and interest as calculated by the A.O. Thus the appellant assessee has been rightly held by the A.O. to be a defaulter for non co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
