2014 (4) TMI 1059 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia)- non-deduction of TDS on rent - Held that - As the rent is to the extent of ₹ 1,20,000 and it does not exceed the limit as prescribed under section 194-I of the Act. Once this is the position, the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS and once the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act can be made. - Decided in favour of assessee. Non-deduction of TDS on electricity charges - Held that - As the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS on this electricity charges, no disallowance by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act can be made. - Decided in favour of assessee. Non-deduction of TDS on commission payment - assessee submitted that the these expenses were wrongly ledgerised under commission account rather these expenses are for free services payment - Held that - Just because there were wrongly grouped as commission, no disallowance can be made, in the interest of natural justice, we set aside the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification afresh whether the expenses of ₹ 2,98,958 has been incurred for free service payment or not. If these expenses are incurred for free services, needless to say that no disallowance can be made - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes . Disallowance on godown rent paid - Held that - The rent paid to above four parties is not exceeding ₹ 1,20,000 in each case and this fact has not been verified by either the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). In such circumstances, learned counsel for the assessee fairly stated that this issue can be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes . Disallowance of advertisement and publicity expenses - Held that - e amount of advertisement and publicity expenses paid to Shresti Lifestyle Entertainment Ltd. is below ₹ 50,000 in whole of the year and once this is the position no disallowance can be made as the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS. - Decided in favour of assessee. Belated payments of employees contribution to provident fund - Held that - Once the issue is decided by the hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Shree Limited, 2011 (9) TMI 30 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT where in it is held that the provident fund and employees State insurance are paid on or before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) of the Act, deduction in respect to the amount on which provident fund and employees State insurance is so paid, is allowable. In the present case the assessee has paid the provident fund and employees State insurance before due date of filing of return under section 139(1) of the Act by the assessee, hence, we allow this ground of appeal of the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of rent and electricity charges for non-deduction of TDS under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act.
2. Disallowance of commission payment for non-deduction of TDS under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.
3. Disallowance of godown rent paid to various parties.
4. Disallowance of advertisement and publicity expenses.
5. Addition on account of belated payments of employees' contribution to provident fund and employees' State insurance.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The first appeal concerns the disallowance of rent and electricity charges for non-deduction of TDS under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The appellant argued that the rent paid did not exceed the prescribed limit for TDS deduction under section 194-I. The Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, stating that since the rent did not exceed the limit, TDS was not required, and thus, no disallowance should be made under section 40(a)(ia) for both rent and electricity charges.

Issue 2:
The second appeal pertains to the disallowance of commission payments for non-deduction of TDS under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The appellant contended that the expenses were wrongly categorized as commission payments instead of free services. The Tribunal ordered a fresh verification by the Assessing Officer to determine if the expenses were indeed for free services. Pending verification, the disallowance was set aside in the interest of natural justice.

Issue 3:
In the third appeal, the disallowance of godown rent paid to various parties was challenged. The Tribunal noted that the rent amounts did not exceed the threshold for TDS deduction. Consequently, the matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer for verification. If the rent amounts were below the prescribed limit, no disallowance was to be made.

Issue 4:
The next issue involved the disallowance of advertisement and publicity expenses. The Tribunal found that the expenses paid were below the threshold for TDS deduction, and hence, no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) was warranted. The disallowance made by the Assessing Officer was deleted.

Issue 5:
The final issue concerned the addition on account of belated payments of employees' contribution to provident fund and employees' State insurance. The Tribunal referred to a relevant High Court decision that allowed deductions if the payments were made before the due date of filing the return. As the appellant had paid the contributions before the filing deadline, the Tribunal allowed the appeal on this ground.

In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeals of the assessee for statistical purposes, addressing various issues related to TDS disallowances and rent payments, emphasizing compliance with TDS provisions and timely payment of employee contributions.