9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Appeal against disallowance of commission paid u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act, 1961 for assessment year 2007-08.
Summary: The assessee, a real estate company, filed a return of income showing &8377; 3,67,58,515, with final taxable income of &8377; 3,77,76,730. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed &8377; 7.50 lakhs u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act due to non-deduction of tax on certain commissions paid to RDX Impex & Sales Promotion Ltd. and SRS Buildcon P. Ltd. The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of &8377; 7 lakhs, leading to the assessee's appeal. The assessee contended that the disallowance was wrongly made as the amount had already been paid and was not payable, citing precedents like Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. DCIT and K. Srinivas Naidu vs. ACIT. The Departmental Representative (DR) supported the impugned order. The Tribunal examined the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, emphasizing that the word "payable" does not include "paid." Referring to Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., it was held that section 40(a)(ia) applies only to amounts due and outstanding, not to those already paid. As no contrary decision was presented, the Tribunal concluded that the CIT(A) erred in not following the precedent. Therefore, the disallowance of &8377; 7 lakhs was deleted, and the appeal by the assessee was allowed. In conclusion, the Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, emphasizing the strict construction of section 40(a)(ia) and the distinction between "paid" and "payable" amounts in determining the applicability of tax deduction provisions.
|
