TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 283X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case for non-deduction of TDS. AO shall be entitled to make such enquiry from the payee (Bajaj Finance Ltd.) as may be considered expedient to ascertain whether there is any loss of Revenue by such non-deduction. Assessing Officer shall delete the disallowance of amount carried out under s. 40(a)(ia) where it is found that the payee concerned has included the receipt obtained from the assessee for the purposes of computation of total income in its return. In other words, disallowance under s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act will not survive in the hands of assessee where deductee has also included the corresponding income in its return of income. The issue raised is restored back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh determination. Addit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Y) 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.AO has erred in disallowing interest of ₹ 171,801/- under section 40(a)(ia) of the income tax act 1961? 2. Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.AO has erred in disallowing bad debt of ₹ 450,000/- under section 36(1)(viii) of income tax act 1961? 3. Without prejudice to ground of appeal no. 2, whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.AO has erred otherwise also in not allowing bad debt of ₹ 450,000/- as business loss? 4. Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld.AO has erred in making a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case for non-deduction of TDS. The Assessing Officer shall be entitled to make such enquiry from the payee (Bajaj Finance Ltd.) as may be considered expedient to ascertain whether there is any loss of Revenue by such non-deduction. Needless to say, the Assessing Officer shall delete the disallowance of amount carried out under s. 40(a)(ia) where it is found that the payee concerned has included the receipt obtained from the assessee for the purposes of computation of total income in its return. In other words, disallowance under s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act will not survive in the hands of assessee where deductee has also included the corresponding income in its return of income. The issue raised is restored back to the file of the Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) as well, the assessee could not derive any relief. 8.3. Further aggrieved, the assessee preferred the appeal before the Tribunal. 8.4. The Ld.AR for the assessee in the course of hearing, strenuously harped on the fact that the loss have been taken for a very brief period and also repaid through banking channel in the same financial year in respect of loans taken from Sarojben Shah (₹ 4 lakhs), Wonder world (INC) (₹ 6 lakhs) and Satnam Electric Service Centre (₹ 2,91,000). It was further pointed out that loans of ₹ 10 lakhs obtained from S. Kumar Computers Pvt. Ltd. has also been repaid in the next financial year. Additional evidences in the form of bank statement was filed to prove the factum of repayment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of re-payment to the lenders, if so considered expedient. Thus, the action of CIT(A) is cancelled and the additions made on account of receipt from aforesaid four parties is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for necessary verification as noted above to enable him to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 10. At this juncture, it will be relevant to note the pertinent observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. P.K. Noorjahan (1999) 237 ITR 570 (SC) in the context of the expression 'may' with reference to Section 69 of the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in that case observed that the word 'may' should not be read as 'shall'. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
