2018 (5) TMI 340 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal upholds CIT(A)'s decision on tax disallowance, emphasizes correct deduction. (A)

ACIT-16 (1), Mumbai Versus M/s. Lamhas Satellite Services Limited And Vice-Versa

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for short-deduction of tax at source for Assessment Years ... TDS u/s 194C OR 194J - addition u/s 40(a)(ia) - Held that:- As in S.K. Tekriwal (2012 (12) TMI 873 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT) noticed that the conditions prescribed u/s 40(a)(ia) for making the disallowance envisaged that tax was deductible at source, but such tax had not been deducted. As per the Hon'ble High Court, where tax has been deducted by the assessee, even under a bona fide wrong impression, under wrong provisions of the TDS, the disallowance envisaged u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act is not triggered. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues involved:Appeal and cross objection regarding disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Years 2011-12 and 2012-13.Analysis:1. Assessment Year 2011-12:- The appellant, engaged in satellite services, faced disallowance for short-deduction of tax at source under section 40(a)(ia).- The CIT(A) relied on a precedent in the appellant's favor from a previous year and directed the Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance.- The Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that short-deduction of tax does not trigger section 40(a)(ia) if tax has been deducted, even under a wrong provision.2. Assessee's Cross Objection - Assessment Year 2011-12:- The cross objection contended that tax was correctly deducted under section 194C, not 194J as assessed.- The CIT(A) set aside the disallowance based on short deduction, not addressing the plea regarding the correct deduction under section 194C.- Following a precedent from a previous year, the Tribunal remanded the issue back to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication.3. Assessment Year 2012-13:- The issues in this year were similar to those in 2011-12, with the same arguments and decisions.- The Tribunal applied its judgment from the previous year to dismiss the Revenue's appeal and allow the assessee's cross objection.In conclusion, for both assessment years, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) for short-deduction of tax at source. The Tribunal emphasized that the disallowance provision is not triggered if tax has been deducted, even if under a wrong provision. The cross objection regarding the correct deduction section was remanded back to the CIT(A) for proper consideration. The decisions were based on precedents and the specific facts of the case, ensuring fairness and adherence to tax laws.