IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).3891/2017 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No(s). 30221/2015) M/S PRADEEP SINGH WAZIR APPELLANT (s) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR. RESPONDENT(s) ORDER Leave granted. We have heard learned counsel for parties at this stage finally. appellant/assessee is involved in undertaking transport contracts. During relevant year, it entered into contract with army for carriage of goods and personnel etc. In this regard, amount of Rs. 74,81,106/- is said to have been received from army including interest element of Rs. 1043/-. amount of Rs. 57,98,885/- was debited by assessee as hiring charges. Upon verification, Assessing Officer found that details of vehicles provided by assessee through which contract was supposed to be executed and hiring charges paid were cars, scooters, tractors etc. Confronted with situation, assessee withdrew details of vehicles furnished earlier, which were Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ASHWANI KUMAR Date: 2017.03.24 stated to have been hired by it, and furnished another list of 15:30:11 IST Reason: vehicles with some details of trips undertaken by each vehicle. Return of income was filed by appellant for Assessment Year 2 2008-09. Assessing Officer vide its order dated 27.12.2010 by invoking provisions of Section 40(a) (ia) of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'), disallowed amount of Rs.55,59,585/- and added it back to income of assessee. Assessing Officer computed income of assessee as per provisions of Section 144 of Act which worked out to RS.9,93,069/-. Against order of Assessing Officer, appeal was preferred by assessee. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) vide its order dated 09.07.2012 reduced net profit rate from 12.5% to 5% and held that Assessing Officer could not have made any disallowance under Section 40(a) (ia) of Act. Aggrieved by said order, Revenue filed appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal(hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal'). Tribunal vide its order dated 29.11.2012 set aside findings of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia)of Act. assessee being aggrieved filed appeal before High Court. High Court vide impugned judgment dated 01.06.2015 dismissed appeal. Hence, present appeal. We find that High Court has referred to provisions of Sub-Section(3) of Section 194C of Act as well as Rule 29D of Income Tax Rules. Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 29D stipulates that particulars under third proviso to clause(i) of sub-section (3) of Section 194C to be furnished by contractor responsible for paying any sum to such sub-contractor shall be in Form No. 15J. High Court has treated filling of said Form as prerequisite and on that basis held that provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of Act could not be invoked. 3 In process High Court has failed to notice that even that aspect of not filling Form No. 15J is kept aside, in present case, income of assessee on total contract receipts of Rs.74,81,106/- had been reached at by applying net rate of profit after reduction and, thus, no further addition could be made under Section 40(a)(ia) of Act. This is reason which is rightly ascribed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)to order. As result, this appeal is allowed.....J. [A.K. SIKRI] .....J. [ASHOK BHUSHAN] NEW DELHI; MARCH 10, 2017. 4 ITEM NO.2 COURT NO.8 SECTION IIIA SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 30221/2015 (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01/06/2015 in ITA No. 04/2013 01/06/2015 in ITA No. 4/2013 passed by High Court Of Jammu & kashmir At Srinagar) M/S PRADEEP SINGH WAZIR Petitioner(s) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ANR. Respondent(s) (WITH OFFICE REPORT) Date : 10/03/2017 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. SIKRI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK BHUSHAN For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ambhoj Kumar Sinha,Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Niranjana Singh, Adv. Mrs. Anil Katiyar,Adv. UPON hearing counsel Court made following ORDER Leave granted. appeal is allowed in terms of signed order. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of accordingly. (Ashwani Thakur) (Mala Kumari Sharma) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (Signed order is placed on file) Pradeep Singh Wazir v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Anr