2023 (6) TMI 764

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The solitary issue raised by the assessee is that the Ld. PCIT erred in holding the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, as erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 3. The necessary facts arising from the order of the authorities below are that the assessee in the present case is a private limited company and case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny to verify whether the payment has been made after deducting the TDS u/s 194C of the Act. However, the AO in the assessment proceedings has accepted income declared by the assessee at Rs. 40,22,070/- only. 4. Subsequently, the Ld. PCIT on examination of the assessment records found that the assessee has....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessment order is passed within the prescribed time limit as stipulated under section 153(3) of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. PCIT, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. The Ld. AR before us filed a paper book running from pages 1 to 55 and contended that the AO has framed assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act after necessary verification which is evident from the assessment order itself. 6.1 Besides above, the Ld. AR also submitted that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, cannot be invoked in the case of short deduction of TDS. Thus, the Ld. AR in view of the above contended that there is no error in the order of the assessment causing prejudicial to the interest of revenue. 7. On the other hand, the Ld....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n record. We have also gone through the Tax Audit Report in Form No. 3CD placed at pages 20 to 49 of the Paper Book. Annexure-XIV of the Tax Audit report gives the details of tax deductible under various sections of the Act. Page 1 of Annexure-XIV gives the details of payments on which tax has not been deducted at all. The total amount of expenditure is at Rs. 7,32, 827/-. Pages 2 to 6 of Annexure-XIV give the details where there shortfall due to lesser deduction than required to be deducted. The total amount of expenses is at Rs. 20,24,4557/- on which shortfall of tax at Rs. 3,26,011/- has been worked out by the tax auditors: Page 3 of the Annexure gives the details where tax has been deducted but not paid to the credit of the Central Gove....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....owing the precedents it is held that disallowance of rs. 20,24,455/- is not justified. The Assessing Officer is directed to delete the addition." In view of the above, the order passed by Ld. CIT (A) deleting the additions of Rs. 60, 60, 960/- and Rs. 8,86,940/- is hereby upheld. Both these grounds of revenue are dismissed." 8.1 In that view of the matter, the same view is confirmed by the Tribunal in its order, and therefore, we are in complete agreement with the order passed by the Tribunal. No substantial question of law is made out and the appeal is devoid of any merits and deserves to be Hence, this appeal is dismissed. 8.1 From the above judgment, there remains no IOTA of doubt that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act ....