9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 789X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charges amounting to Rs. 3,12,597/- paid to stock exchange which stands deleted by the ld. CIT(A). 3. The assessee in the present case is a partnership firm which is engaged in the business of share and stock broking. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 31.10.2005 declaring total income of Rs. 3,15,297/-. In the P&L account filed along with the said return, the amount paid to stock exchange on account of Leaseline charges amounting to Rs.1,66,301/-, V. Sat charges amounting to Rs. 3,12,597/- and transaction charges amounting to Rs. 4,45,024/- was debited by the assessee. According to the A.O., the said charges paid by the assessee to the stock exchange were for the services of technical and managerial n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e payment thereof. 4. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material on record. It is observed that the issue involved in ground No. 1 to 7 of the Revenue's appeal relating to disallowance on account of Leaseline charges and V. sat charges made u/s. 40(a)(ia) is squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Kotak Securities Limited reported in 25 SOT 440 wherein it was held that stock exchanges did not render any managerial or technical services and therefore fees paid to them cannot be subjected to deduction of tax at source u/s. 194J. It was held that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) therefore could not be in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made in regular course of business and not for infraction of law as envisaged in proviso to section 37(1). In our opinion, these decisions of the Tribunal are squarely applicable to the issue under consideration and respectfully following the same, we uphold the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) deleting the disallowance made by the A.O. on account of penalty paid by the assessee to BSE on violation of the bye laws of the stock exchange. Ground No. 8 to 12 of Revenue's appeal are accordingly dismissed. 7. As regards the C.O. filed by the assessee, we may note at the outset that there is a delay of 128 days on the part of the assessee tin filing the said C.O. In this regard, an Affidavit of partner of the assessee firm is filed before us exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
