Madhya Pradesh High Court
Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax vs M/S Excel Freight Carries Pvt. Ltd. on 6 January, 2017
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
I.T.A. No : 91 OF 2016
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax
- V/s -
M/s Excel Freight Carriers Pvt. Ltd.
Present : Honâble Shri Acting Chief Justice Rajendra
Menon.
Honâble Smt. Justice Anjuli Palo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Sanjay Lal, learned counsel for the appellant.
Shri Rahul Diwakar, learned counsel for the respondent.
ORDER
(06/01/2016) As a very short question of law is involved in the matter i.e. as to whether, the tribunal itself could go into various aspects of the matter and determine the question with regard to date of deposit of TDS of the assessee prior to or after due date of filing the return, therefore, treating this question to be the question of law, we proceed to decide this appeal.
2. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we find that the learned tribunal in Paragraph-4 of it's impugned order has directed as under and for determining the due date of deposit of TDS has remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer :
â4. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the ld. CIT (A) has held that as per amendment in Section 40(a)(ia), if the assessee proves that the deduction of any tax was paid before the due date of filing of return and if the TDS amount is deposited before the due date of filing the return, then no disallowance can be made under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has directed to verify this claim of the assessee. Therefore, we are of the view that the ld.CIT (A) is justified in his action. Our interference is not called for.â
3. As canvassed by Shri Lal, the tribunal itself being a final appellate court with regard to factual aspect of the matter could have conducted the enquiry and fact finding exercise and for this purpose, remanding of the matter is not necessary, as remand of the matter would further result in filing of the appeals. All these could be avoided if the tribunal conducted it's exercise, instead of remanding the matter.
4. That being so, we allow this appeal, quash the order passed by the tribunal for remand of the matter and hold that the tribunal itself shall determine the question as indicated in Paragraph-4 of it's order.
5. With the aforesaid, this appeal stands allowed and disposed of.
(RAJENDRA MENON) (SMT. ANJULI PALO) ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE JUDGE nd