TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 160
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....p; 2. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has grossly erred in law and fats of the case in holding that the action of the Assessing Officer in passing the ex parte assessment order u/s 144 of the Act was in order. 3. That the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in law and facts of the case in disbelieving the contention of the assessee that a sum of Rs.38,12,587/- was the amount of expenditure incurred at various sites for daily wages of casual workers, material purchase and other incidental expenses which was not subject to the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act, and in upholding the action of the Assessing Officer on the issue. 4. That the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in not appreciating the submission of the appellant date....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e had claimed administration expenses of Rs. 39,31,851/- and those administrative expenses includes 'outside job work charges' of Rs. 38,12,587/-. According to the Assessing Officer, the audit report attached with the return of income specifically pointed out that these expenses are 'outside job work charges'. Therefore, the Assessing Officer observed that the provisions of Section 40 (a) (ia) will be applicable and as the tax has not been deducted thereon the said amount was liable to be added to the income of the assessee. He rejected the books of account and taking analogy from Section 44AD, he assessed the income @ 8% of 40.08 lac. He also disallowed a sum of Rs. 36,87,447/- on account of application of Section 40(a)(ia) by restricting ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the detailed contractual receipt of the assessee are Rs. 40,08,087/- for earning of which the assessee had claimed 'outside job work' of Rs. 38,12,587/-. It was submitted that 'outside job work' of Rs. 38,12,587/- is the total of all the expenses of various sites from where the assessee company had earned the contractual receipt the details of which were being furnished to the CIT (A) for his perusal and records. It was submitted that the expenses are in the nature of casual/daily wages and also daily expenses which are not covered u/s 192 of the Act, therefore, TDS was not deductible. Against these submissions, learned CIT (A) has returned a finding that as per Schedule 10 of the final accounts, administrative expenses include 'outsi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e assessee did not produce books of account, bills, vouchers at the stage of assessment and the assessee is also challenging the application of estimation of rate @ 8%. 5. The present appeal was fixed for hearing on 21st April, 2011 and it was felt necessary that the contents of audit report, relying upon which it has been held that the payments made by the assessee were liable for deduction of tax, were required to be placed on file. The matter was adjourned to 25th April, 2011. Learned AR of the assessee has produced before us complete copy of audit report. He drew our attention towards column No. 17 (f) in Form No.3CD which read as under:- "17 (f) Amounts inadmissible under section 40 (a) - NIL" 6. He furthe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essee was liable for deduction of tax. He submitted that neither the Assessing Officer nor the CIT (A) has properly appreciated the position and have wrongly held that the payments made by the assessee are liable for deduction of tax and, in this manner, he contested the action of the CIT (A) in upholding the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of application of Section 40(a)(ia) as well as the estimation made by the Assessing Officer for rejecting the books of account. 8. On the other hand, relying upon the order of Assessing Officer and CIT (A), it was pleaded by learned DR that the additions have rightly been upheld and the order of the CIT (A) should be confirmed. 9. We have carefully considered the riv....