TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (1) TMI 217
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....engaged in the business of civil contractor and stated to be deriving income from contract business. Assessee filed his return of income for A.Y. 2010-11 on 15.10.2010 declaring income of Rs. 20,99,320/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and thereafter, assessment was framed under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961, vide order dated 11.03.2013 and the total income of the assessee was determined at Rs. 98,78,740/- 2.2. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide order dated 16.12.2014 Appeal No. 107/13-14, granted partial relief of the assessee. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal. The Hon'ble T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to adjudicate the ground relating to the claim of adhoc disallowance of Rs. 28,823/- in respect of claim under the heads staff and labour welfare and miscellaneous expenses. 4(1). That the CIT(A) has also erred in confirming addition of Rs. 39,203/- on account of notional interest without proper appreciation of facts and legal provisions. (ii). That even otherwise, payment of advance was out of its own funds and on account of business and commercial expediency and as such there is no factual or legal basis for addition of Rs. 39,203/- as notional interest income. 5. That order of the lower authorities are not justified on facts and same are bad in law. 4. Before us at the outset the Ld. AR submitted that ground no 2 & 3 raised by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ear, assessee was not required to deduct TDS, if the amount paid did not exceed the prescribed limit. She submitted that the table would reveal that there are certain payment to parties which would fall below the limit prescribed and therefore the assessee will not be required to deduct TDS u/s. 194C of the Act. She therefore submitted that the addition of such amount be deleted. She however fairly conceded that there is no finding of the lower authorities on the issue. 11. Ld. DR on the other hand supported the order of the lower authorities and further submitted that there is no finding of the lower authorities on the plea taken by the Ld.AR that certain payments to the contractors do not exceed the limit prescribed u/s. 194C of the Act.....