Special Audit Reference Validity Affirmed; Freight Expense Disallowance Deleted Due to No TDS Breach or Contracts.

The ITAT partly allowed the appeal, affirming the validity of the special audit reference and the assessment order. It deleted the disallowance of freight expenses for non-deduction of TDS, as no single payment exceeded the prescribed limit, and no contract existed with truck owners. The disallowance of depreciation on the truck was dismissed, as it was not pressed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the assessment order as being barred by limitation.
2. Legality of the reference to special audit under Section 142(2A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. Disallowance of business expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of TDS on freight payments.
4. Disallowance of depreciation on the truck.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Assessment Order as Being Barred by Limitation:
The assessee contended that the assessment order was barred by limitation as per the provisions of Section 142(2A), 142(2C) read with Section 153(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue objected, stating that the order for special audit under Section 142(2A) was not appealable before the ITAT. The Tribunal, however, disagreed with the Revenue, holding that the validity of the assessment order, including the reference for special audit, could be challenged before the ITAT. The Tribunal cited various case laws to support its position that the reference for special audit is integral to the assessment process and thus appealable.

2. Legality of the Reference to Special Audit under Section 142(2A):
The assessee argued that the reference to special audit was invalid as there was no complexity in the accounts, which is a prerequisite for such a reference. The AO had noted discrepancies in the freight payments and related documents, leading to the reference for special audit. The Tribunal upheld the reference for special audit, agreeing with the AO and CIT(A) that the accounts were complex due to the volume of transactions and discrepancies in the documents. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the reference made for special audit, dismissing the assessee's contention.

3. Disallowance of Business Expenditure under Section 40(a)(ia) for Non-Deduction of TDS on Freight Payments:
The assessee claimed exemption from TDS on freight payments under the third proviso to Section 194C(3), stating that payments were made to small truck owners who did not own more than two trucks. The AO, noting discrepancies in the documents, disallowed the freight expenses under Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS. The Tribunal, however, found that the Revenue had not doubted the veracity of the freight expenses but only the claim of exemption. The Tribunal held that there was no contract, oral or written, with the truck owners, and each GR was a separate contract. Citing the jurisdictional High Court's decisions, the Tribunal concluded that the assessee was not liable to deduct TDS as no single payment exceeded the prescribed limit. The disallowance of freight expenses was thus deleted.

4. Disallowance of Depreciation on Truck:
This issue was not pressed before the Tribunal and was thus dismissed.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal, upholding the validity of the special audit reference and the assessment order but deleting the disallowance of freight expenses for non-deduction of TDS. The disallowance of depreciation on the truck was dismissed as it was not pressed. The order was pronounced on 14.08.2020.

---