TDS u/s 194A of the Income Tax Act, 1961

This case concerns an individual running a vehicle hire business who paid interest on loans from a Non-Banking Finance Company. The assessee appealed an order related to TDS under Section 194A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Although the recipient had declared the interest income, the assessee failed to file the required auditor's certificate (Form 26A). The appeal was filed with a significant delay, citing the previous representative's absence from a hearing. Ultimately, the appeal was allowed for statistical purposes.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
“SMC-B” BENCH : BANGALORE
BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT
ITA No.358/Bang/2021
Assessment Year : 2014-15

Shri. Munivenkatappa Shivanna,
Prop: Maruthi Manunath Travels,
No.208/1, Idasarahalli Kempegowda
Main Road,
Dasarahalli Near Aswath Katte,
Bengaluru City – 560 027.
PAN : BIXPS 0619 B

APPELLANT

vs

ACIT,
Circle – 7(2)(1),
Bengaluru.

RESPONDENT
Appellant by : Shri. Adam Kajabee, CA
Respondent by : Shri. Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Date of hearing : 23.08.2021
Date of Pronouncement : 24.08.2021
O R D E R
 

The assessee is an individual engaged in the business of running vehicles on hire. The assessee paid a sum of Rs.5,75,710 as interest on loans borrowed from a Non-Banking Finance Company M/s.Cholmandalam Investments and Finance Co.Ltd.

2. Before the CIT(Appeals), the assessee apart from other submissions, submitted that the recipient of payment from the assessee has included the amount received from assessee in the return of income filed for AY 2014- 15. The Assessee did not file Form 26A which is the certificate of auditor certifying that the payee has included the amount received from the assessee in his return of income filed for the relevant assessment year and paid taxes thereon.

3. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. There is a delay of 188 days in filing this appeal by the assessee. It has been stated in the application for condonation of delay that one Shri. G. R. Reddy, CA of the assessee who represented the assessee before CIT(A) did not attend the hearing before CIT(A) which resulted in ex-party order being passed by the CIT(A).

4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical
purposes.
Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption.

Please find attached the enclosed file for the full judgement