TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (11) TMI 987
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 30.6.2017 made in ITA.No.928/Mds/2017 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) for the assessment year 2012-13. 3. The assessee has filed this appeal by raising the following substantial questions of law : "i. Whether the provisions of Section 37(1) of the Act was properly applied in making the disallowance of expenses booked for lorry hire, which were incurred in connection with the business of goods transporters/carriers and were booked in computing the taxable total income on the accepted method of accounting namely mercantile/accrued system of accounting consistently followed while recording the perverse findings of facts in para 6 of the Appellate Tribunal's order ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the assessee had shown as lorry expenses payable amounting to Rs. 21,12,000/- as per the financial statements submitted. The details, which were called for by the Assessing Officer, were furnished and the copies of the ledgers were also produced. The Assessing Officer came to the conclusion that the assessee did not furnish the particulars for the expenses incurred and hence, a sum of Rs. 21,12,000/- was added back to the returned income by passing the assessment order dated 14.3.2015. 5. As against the said assessment order dated 14.3.2015, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai [for brevity, the CIT(A)]. Along with the appeal petition, the assessee produced the details of freight cha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat though the details were given, the Assessing Officer came to an erroneous conclusion that those vouchers were self made. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the findings rendered by the Assessing Officer in the remand report that the amounts were cleared by the assessee in April 2014 i.e. nearly after two years after the end of the relevant previous year and taking note of the net profit earned by the assessee, disbelieved the stand of the assessee and dismissed the appeal by order dated 30.6.2017. 8. Thereafter, the assessee filed a miscellaneous application under Section 254(2) of the Act by filing MP.No.287/Chny/2017 by pointing out that the Assessing Officer, while submitting his remand report, committed a factual mistake stati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssibility and correctness of the details produced by the assessee before the CIT(A), on which, the remand report was called for. Therefore, the exercise, which should have been adopted by the Assessing Officer, is to examine the details and if necessary, call for at least a few of the lorry owners, whose details such as PAN particulars, registration numbers of the trucks were furnished and then should have come to a conclusion as to whether those documents would substantiate the stand taken by the assessee. 11. We find that no such exercise was conducted by the Assessing Officer while the matter was sent back to him for considering the documents produced by the assessee for the first time before the CIT(A). We also find in the remand repor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rticulars, in such form and within such time as may be prescribed, which the assessee failed to do. Therefore, unless and until the assessee complies with the condition stipulated in Sub-Section (7) of Section 194C of the Act, the assessee will not be entitled to claim deduction under Section 194C(7) of the Act. 13. This very issue was considered by us in the decision in the case of CIT Vs. M/s.Sri Parameswari Spinning Mills Private Limited [TCA.No. 601 of 2018 dated 01.7.2019] and we rejected such a contention raised by the Revenue in the following terms : "6. We find Sub-Section (6) of Section 194C is the provision which grants benefit to the assessee. This benefit comes with the condition of compliance of Sub-Section (7) of Section 19....