TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 336X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... will be in fitness of things to remit the matter to the file of the AO for fresh order after due verification at the end of the AO whether the requirements under Section 194C(7) have been complied with by the assessee. We set aside the impugned consolidated appellate order dated 30.05.2016 of the Ld. CIT(A) and the aforesaid consolidated order dated 23.03.2015 of the AO and restore the issue in dispute to the file of the AO for fresh order in accordance with law after due verification at his end whether the requirements under Section 194C(7) of I.T. Act have been duly complied with by the assessee. Needless to say, the AO will provide reasonable opportunity to the assessee before passing fresh order, in order to substantiate the claim th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Section 194C of Income Tax Act, 1961 and furnished prescribed Form No. 26Q to the Income Tax Officer (TDS) alongwith relevant details required by the law. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, modify or forego any of the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing. ITA No.-4316/Del/2016 1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law, wrong on facts and against the principles of natural justice. 2.(a) That the on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the order of Income Tax Officer (TDS), Noida, treating the appellant as an assessee in default for non-deduction of TDS u/s 194C on payments made to the Transporters. (b) Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot complied with requirements under Section 194C(7) of I.T. Act. The relevant portion of the impugned consolidated appellate order dated 30.05.2016 is reproduced as under: 2. The dispute between the appellant and the Id. A.O. is fairly simple. There is no dispute on facts. Admittedly, the appellant has made payment to the transporters and has not deducted tax as was considered necessary by the Id. A.O. u/s. 194C of l.T. Act, 1961.The appellant has taken a view that after the amendment to the provisions of section 194C by the Finance Act No.2 of 2009 by which a new provision of sub-section 6 was inserted in Section 194C there was no requirement to deduct tax at source on payments to a contractor for plying good carriages etc., and as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unity from deducting tax at source to the transporters at large. But the drafting of sub-section 6 of section 194C failed to take care of the intent of the Legislature and created a situation where such an immunity got granted to every transporter irrespective of the size of its business. It was because of this that Finance Act, 2015 amended the provision of sub-section 6 of section 194C and removed the said deficiency w.e.f. 01/06/2015. In view of this the stand taken by the Id. A.O. is not sustainable in the eyes of the law. 4. However, having said as above, the provisions of sub-section 7 of section 194C were also brought on the statue by the Finance Act No.2 of 2009 and it is seen that the appellant appears not to have complied w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the financial year 2013-14 and 2014-15 5. Copy of notice dated 23.02.2015 issued by the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Noida to furnish details of person and payment of freight and cartage / payment to transports. 6. Copy of letter dated 27.02.2015 filed before the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Noida in response to notice dated 23.02.2015 furnishing the details of payment of freight and cartage made to transport Operators by the appellant company for the financial year 2013-14. 7. Copy of letter dated 05.03.2015 filed before the Income Tax Officer (TDS), Noida in response to notice dated 23.02.2015 furnishing the details of payment of freight and cartage made to transport Operators by the appellant company for the financial ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntrary to the observation of the Ld. CIT(A) in paragraph 4 and 5 of the impugned consolidated appellate order dated 30.05.2016. In the words of Ld. CIT(A): appellant appears not to have complied with the requirements of sub-section 7. The ld. A.O. though has not examined this issue specifically but the spirit of the law seems to have been complied with as the ld. A.O. has made enquiries about the status of the transporters and furnishing of PAN etc. by those transporters. 5. As the appellant has not complied with the requirement of sub section 7 of section 194C it is not entitled to the benefit of sub-section 6 though in the case of lawful compliance of sub section 7 it would have been entitled for the same. . In view of the foregoing, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
