Govindam Clearing Agencies Pvt. Ltd Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur)
AO had disallowed the interest and made an addition of Rs. 18,315/- on account of late deposit of TDS by the assessee.
We find that the facts are undisputed that the assessee has claimed interest as expense incurred for delayed payment of TDS. We find that this interest is paid for default in respect to statutory liabilities and this interest cannot be treated as business expenditure under section 37(1) of the Act.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of ld.CIT (A)-4, Jaipur dated 01.11.2018 for the Assessment Year
2016-17 passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on the grounds mentioned hereinbelow.
‘’1. On the facts and in the circumstances ad in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 3,51,470/- made by the AO on account of alleged unaccounted cash found at the time of search.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances ad in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 18,315/- made by the AO on account of disallowance of interest paid on late deposit of TDS of Rs. 18,315/-.”
2.1 Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of custom house agent and filed its return of income on 23-092016 for the year under consideration declaring total income at Rs. 69,82,640/-. The assessee belongs to Ramesh Chand Manihar Group, Jaipur on whose premises a search u/s 132 of the Act was carried out on 7-01-2016. Various assets/books of account and documents were found and seized as per annexure prepared during the course of search. Finally, the AO completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153B(1)(b) of the Act vide order dated 28-12-2017 at a total income of Rs. 73,52,425/- as against returned income of Rs. 69,82,640/-. The AO also made an addition of Rs. 18,315/- on account of disallowance of interest on TDS.
2.2 Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
2.3 Now aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee preferred the present appeal before us on the grounds mentioned hereinabove.
3.1 The Ground No. 1 of the assessee relates to challenging the order of the ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs. 3,51,470/- made by the AO on account of unaccounted cash found at the time of search.
3.2 The ld.AR appearing on behalf of the assessee reiterated the same arguments as were raised by him before the ld. CIT(A) and also relied on the written submissions submitted before us which are reproduced below.
‘’i) Total cash found
During the course of assessment proceeding the cash amounting to Rs. 6,29,400/- pertaining to assessee was found following premises: –
