TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 205
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A)-1/Kol. has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.42,58,982/- made towards "Dock Expenses". iv)On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld CIT(A)-1/Kol. has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.4,56,40,926/- made towards "Shipping Company Charges". v)The appellant craves the leave to make any addition, alteration, modification etc. of the grounds either before the appellate proceedings, or in the course of appellate proceedings." 2. Ground Nos.1 to 3 - Vide Ground Nos.1 to 3, the Revenue has agitated the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made by Assessing Officer ( in short 'the AO') on account of non-deduction of TDS on certain payments made towards clearing and forwarding charges (CFS charges), plot rent and Dock charges. 3. The brief facts relating to the issue are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of transporting, arranging clearance of goods and other services meant for export and import for and on behalf of various customers. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee company during the year had paid CFS charges to Emee Logistics....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he services rendered to the aforesaid company and also collected actual expenses incurred for statutory charges and shipping company expenses as per agreed terms between the appellant and Electosteel Ltd and it was averred that the appellant had reimbursed the sum of Rs.24,07,539/- on account of CFS charges paid to M/s. Emee Logistics (P) Ltd for the previous year ending 31.3.2012." 5. We have heard the rival contentions of the Ld. Representatives of the parties. At the outset, the ld. DR has invited our attention to an order dated 31.12.2018 of the CIT(A) passed u/s 154 of the Act for the purpose of rectification of mistakes that have occurred in the impugned order of the CIT(A) dated 06.09.2018. The ld. DR has brought to our attention that there were as many as 10 factual mistakes in the impugned order of the CIT(A) that have been pointed out and rectified by the ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 31.12.2018. The ld. DR has further invited our attention to the impugned order of the CIT(A) to submit that the same has been passed in haphazard and hurried manner without proper application of mind and, therefore, so many mistakes have crept in the said order for which the rectification or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ersonal purposes of such individual or any member of Hindu undivided family. (5) No deduction shall be made from the amount of any sum credited or paid or likely to be credited or paid to the account of, or to, the contractor, if such sum does not exceed thirty thousand rupees : Provided that where the aggregate of the amounts of such sums credited or paid or likely to be credited or paid during the financial year exceeds one lakh rupees, the person responsible for paying such sums referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to deduct income-tax under this section. (6) No deduction shall be made from any sum credited or paid or likely to be credited or paid during the previous year to the account of a contractor during the course of business of plying, hiring or leasing goods carriages, where such contractor owns ten or less goods carriages at any time during the previous year and furnishes a declaration to that effect along with his Permanent Account Number, to the person paying or crediting such sum. (7) The person responsible for paying or crediting any sum to the person referred to in sub-section (6) shall furnish, to the prescribed income-tax authority or the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n relation to such customer as is the person placed in relation to the assessee under the provisions contained in clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 40A but does not include manufacturing or supplying a product according to the requirement or specification of a customer by using material purchased from a person, other than such customer." A perusal of the aforesaid provisions of section 194C would show that any person responsible for paying any sum to any resident/contractor for carrying out any work in pursuance of a contract between the contractor and a specified person shall be liable to deduct TDS at the time of credit of such sum to the account of the contractor. The assessee, being a company, falls within the definition and scope of specified person. In this case, the assessee had obtained the services of M/s Emee Logistics Pvt. Ltd. under a contract and paid the requisite charges of Rs.2407539/- to the said M/s Emee Logistics Pvt. Ltd. The case of the Ld. AR is that the assessee was reimbursed for the said expenditure incurred by the assessee by its client M/s Electrosteel Steels Ltd. who had engaged the assessee for the aforesaid services. The facts of the case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the contractor M/s Emee Logistics Pvt. Ltd.. Since, the assessee was the person responsible for making such payment, therefore, the assessee was supposed to deduct TDS on the same. In view of this, the reimbursement theory applied by the ld. CIT(A), in this case, is not applicable. 8. Similarly, the ld. CIT(A) has deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer in respect of expenditure incurred of Rs.68,31,267/- for non-deduction of TDS towards plot rent in violation of provisions of section 194I of the Act and further payment of dock expenses of Rs.4258982/- paid in violation of section 194C of the Act applying the same theory of reimbursement of expenses. However, in view of the above discussion and since the ld. counsel for the assessee could not bring before us as to how the reimbursement theory of expenses is applicable in respect of income assessable of respective payees, therefore, the order of the CIT(A) is not sustainable in respect of the above issues also. The impugned order of the CIT(A) on these issues is, therefore, set aside. 9. At this stage, the ld. counsel for the assessee, has brought to our attention to a plea taken before the CIT(A) that the asse....