9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (10) TMI 388 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of TTS commission expenses - late deposit of TDS - assessee is a dealer in tractors and this commission has been paid to sub-dealers - CIT(A) deleted the disallowance - Held that - The assessee has been making the payment of commission to sub-dealers year to year and it is practice of the trade. Further, the payment has actually been made and TDS is also done. In such circumstances it is not correct to allege that the expenditure is not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business especially when the payees are not relatives of assessee. Further, when the credits/payments in the ledger accounts is made in the month of March, 2009 the assessee has rightly made TDS in March and deposited it before the due date u/s 139(1) to claim the deduction for the assessment year under consideration. No disallowance can be made u/s 40(a)(ia) in such circumstances. We accordingly uphold the order of CIT(A) on this account. We also observe that even if TDS was liable to be made before March, 2009 and the assessee had deducted it during the year and deposited before the due date of filing return u/s 139 (1), no disallowance could have been made in view of our decision in the case of Rajasthan Art Emporium (2014 (11) TMI 43 - ITAT JODHPUR ) wherein it was held that the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2010 in section 40(a)(ia) is clarificatory in nature. - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of sales promotion expenses - AO found that it is incentive paid to 4 employees of the assessee - CIT(A) deleted the disallowance - Held that - No reason to disagree with the ld. CIT(A) in the facts and circumstances of the case where the disallowance of actually paid incentive is made merely by pointing out that the payee is accountant. Similar payments to other persons have been considered allowable by the A.O. Further, there cannot be denial of a situation that one employee is performing various roles in an organisation. We are, therefore, in full agreement with the findings given by the CIT(A) and uphold the same - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of work shop maintenance expenses - CIT(A) deleted the disallowance - Held that - We are in full agreement with ld. CIT(A) that AO did not point out any good reason to treat the expenditure in question as a capital expenditure. He has not brought anything on record to show that some new asset has come into existence by incurring this expenditure. Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the disallowance made in this case is not justified and has rightly been deleted by the CIT(A). Therefore, we dismiss this ground of appeal.- Decided against revenue. Disallowance of PF and ESI - CIT(A) deleted the disallowance - Held that - The issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the judgement of Mumbai High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hindustan Organics Chemical Ltd. (2014 (7) TMI 477 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) wherein even the employees contribution to PF and ESI has been found allowable if paid prior to the due date of filing return u/s 139 (1). The High Court has referred the decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Alom Extrusion Ltd. (2009 (11) TMI 27 - SUPREME COURT ). We accordingly reject this ground of appeal also.- Decided against revenue.
Issues:
1. Disallowance of TTS commission expenses 2. Deletion of disallowance of sales promotion expenses 3. Deletion of disallowance of workshop maintenance expenses 4. Deletion of disallowance of PF and ESI contributions Issue 1 - Disallowance of TTS Commission Expenses: The appeal by the revenue contested the deletion of disallowance of TTS commission expenses. The AO disallowed the expenses due to minor defects, alleging non-compliance with section 40(a)(ia). However, the CIT(A) found the disallowance unjustified as the AO failed to provide evidence that the commission was not paid genuinely. The CIT(A) noted that the commission was credited in the accounts and TDS was deducted and deposited on time. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing that the expenses were legitimate, TDS was done, and no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was warranted. Issue 2 - Deletion of Sales Promotion Expenses Disallowance: The second ground of appeal challenged the deletion of disallowance of sales promotion expenses. The AO disallowed a portion of the claimed expenses, citing an incentive paid to an accountant not involved in sales. The CIT(A) overturned the disallowance, stating that the payment was genuine and no evidence was presented to refute the claim. The ITAT agreed with the CIT(A), emphasizing that one employee can perform multiple roles, and the disallowance lacked merit. Issue 3 - Deletion of Workshop Maintenance Expenses Disallowance: The appeal contested the deletion of disallowance of workshop maintenance expenses. The AO treated the expenses as capital expenditure without sufficient basis. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, noting the lack of evidence supporting the capital expenditure classification. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, stating that the disallowance was unjustified as no new asset was created. Issue 4 - Deletion of PF and ESI Contributions Disallowance: The final ground of appeal challenged the deletion of disallowance of PF and ESI contributions. The AO disallowed the contributions under section 36(1)(va), but the CIT(A) ruled in favor of the assessee, applying section 43B instead. The ITAT supported the CIT(A)'s decision, citing the Mumbai High Court judgment allowing the contributions if paid before the due date of filing the return. The ITAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision. In conclusion, the ITAT dismissed the revenue's appeal for the assessment year 2009-10, affirming the CIT(A)'s decisions on all grounds.
|
