TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1721
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a has erred 1 confirming the action of the Ld. Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore not allowing the TDS credited of Rs. 1,86,305/- as per Rule 37BA of the Income Tax Act. 1961. 2. That the Ld. The Commissioner of Income Tax, ADDL/JCIT (A)-4, Kolkata has erred in not considering that the TDS provision of section 194Q are not applicable on the appellant who it merely a Kacha Arhtiya/Pakka Arhtiya/Commission Basis. 3. That the Ld. The Commissioner of Income Tax, ADDL/JCIT (A)-4, Kolkata has erred in not considering the act that the assessee was mainly acting as commission agent/Kacha Arhtiya and he was earning commission from the parties who has deducted TDS U/s 194Q implying that assessee has not made any sale....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duly been shown by the assessee in his return of income filed for the AY 2022-23. It is hereby pertinent to mention here that the assessee is not the owner of the agriculture produce and hence, the assessee does not sell such goods on his own behalf rather the assessee only acts as a mediator/ agent and for such purpose, the assessee has obtained a registration from the Haryana State Agricultural Market Committee. The copy of the license is placed in the paper book at page no. 1-2. 5. It was submitted that the assessee thus acts as a 'Kacha Arhtiya' and various farmers bring their agricultural produce to a particular platform of a 'kacha arhtiya' licensed by local market committee. The 'kacha arhtiya' only acts as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....03.2022, copy of the same is placed in the paper book at page no. 9. During the year under consideration, the assessee has declared total commission income including Dami to the tune of Rs. 11,88,385/- and the buyers deducted TDS u/s 194H of the Act @ 5% for payments made to the assessee for providing services as commission agent i.e. Kacha Arhatia and the same is reflected in FORM 26AS which is placed in the paper book at page no. 10-14. 8. It was submitted that in the case of the assessee, a buyer namely M/s. Ebro India Private Limited has incorrectly deducted the TDS u/s 194Q of the Act on the incorrect understanding that the assessee is the actual seller of the agriculture produce without considering that the assessee is only a ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ission earned on such sale/purchase is his income which has duly been disclosed by the assessee in his books of account. Further, reliance was placed on the decision of the Coordinate Jaipur Bench in the case of Madan Lai Gupta (ITA No. 192/JPR/2024). 11. Per contra, the ld. DR is heard has relied on the order of the lower authorities. It was submitted that there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the assessee has sold the goods on behalf of the farmers and therefore, in such circumstances, the CPC has rightly restricted the credit of TDS to the extent of receipts offered to tax and which has been duly confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 12. In his rejoinder, the ld. AR submitted that given the opportunity, the assessee can demons....