9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finding that the provisions of section 198 have no application to the assessee, who is a private limited company and not a private company which is subsidiary of a public company - Decided in favor of the assessee Regarding disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - TDS u/s 194J - Held that: , the assessee deducted tax at source, therefore, the provisions of section 40(a(ia) do not apply to the case of the assessee. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) on this count and accordingly, the same is hereby upheld dismissing the ground raised by the revenue. - Decided in favor of the assessee - ITA No. 6248/Mum/2010 - - - Dated:- 29-3-2012 - SHRI RAJENDRA SINGH, SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JJ. Appellant by : Mr. R.S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find the arguments acceptable and invoked section 198 of the Companies Act which pertains to the total managerial remuneration paid by a public limited company or a private company. Accordingly, the AO applied the rate of 11% and disallowed the balance remuneration. On appeal, before the ACIT(A) the assessee had argued strongly on the same lines as before the AO and had submitted that the Directors remuneration of such amounts was consistent in its case. After considering the submissions of the assessee, the CIT(A) held as under:- 2.1.3 Facts and material on record are considered. AO has not brought any other fact, evidence or argument while questioning the quantum of remuneration and commission paid to Directors. Therefore, apart from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the revenue is dismissed. 7. Ground No. 2 is directed against the action of the CIT(A) in directing the AO to restrict disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia). 8. The AO asked the assessee to furnish the details break up of sub-contractual services rendered by various persons to the assessee. From the details filed by the assessee, the AO observed that various services were professional or technical in nature and hence liable for deduction u/s 194J, whereas, the assessee had deducted the same u/s 194C. The AO, accordingly, worked out the disallowance u/s 194J. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). During the appellate proceedings, the assessee was asked to furnish complete details and nature of services/work render ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
