2010 (12) TMI 807 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal deletes disallowance for non-deduction of tax on freight charges (a)(ia)

Chang Hing Tannery Versus DCIT

The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, deleting the disallowance of Rs.23,21,083 under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source on ... Disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) - Held that: submissions of the assesee that the goods were supplied by the suppliers at the factory of the assesee was not disputed by the revenue - As there was no contract between the assessee and the transporters provisions of section 194C of the I.T. Act are not applicable to the facts of this case and the liability to deduct tax on such payments could not be vested on the assessee - Decided in the favour of assessee Issues involved:Disallowance of expenses under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source on freight charges.Analysis:The appeal was against the order confirming the disallowance of Rs.23,21,083 under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source on freight charges. The Assessing Officer added the amount for failure to deduct tax on freight charges. The assessee contended that no tax deduction was required as there was no contract for payment of transport charges, and section 40(a)(ia) applies only when tax has been deducted but not paid. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, stating that tax was liable on freight charges except for payments not exceeding Rs.20,000. The assessee argued that as there was no contract with transporters, section 194C did not apply. The Tribunal found no agreement between the assessee and transporters, as the transporters were arranged by suppliers, leading to the deletion of the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia).The assessee's submissions highlighted that no contract existed between the assessee and transporters as the suppliers arranged the transporters. The Tribunal agreed that without a contract, section 194C did not apply, absolving the assessee of liability to deduct tax on payments to transporters. The revenue did not dispute that transporters were arranged by suppliers, supporting the Tribunal's decision to delete the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia).The Tribunal's decision emphasized the absence of a contract between the assessee and transporters, leading to the conclusion that section 194C did not apply in this case. As the transporters were arranged by suppliers and no contractual relationship existed with the assessee, the liability to deduct tax on payments to transporters was deemed not applicable. Consequently, the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of tax at source on freight charges was deleted, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.