9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 279X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecided in favor of Revenue. - I.T.A. No. 22 /AHD/2013 & CO. No.49/AHD/2013 - - - Dated:- 4-10-2013 - Shri D. K. Tyagi, J. M. And Shri Anil Chaturvedi, A.M.,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri O. P. Batheja, Sr. D. R. For the Respondent : Shri S. N. Soparkar, A.R. ORDER Per Shri Anil Chaturvedi,A. M. 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of CIT(A)-III, Baroda dated 22.10.2012 for A.Y. 2009-10. 2. The facts as culled out from the order of lower authorities are as under: 3. Assessee is a Corporate share broker member of the BSE NSE. It filed its return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 on 25.09.2009 declaring total income of Rs. 1,02,63,170/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e for disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia). He also placed reliance on the decision of Hon. Bombay High Court in the case of Kotak Securities Ltd. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer, Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A), CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the Assessee granted partial relief to the Assessee by holding as under:- 4.2 I have considered the facts of the case and submissions made by the AR of the appellant. The Bombay High Court in its order in the of Securities Ltd, (supra) has clearly held that the person making payment of transaction charges to stock exchanges is required to make TDS on such payment. The appellant is a member of BSE NSE and in this capacity is making payment of transaction charges t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the payment of transaction charges paid to stock exchanges. He further submitted that CIT(A) relying on the Special Bench decision in the case of Merilyn Shipping and Transport (supra) has held that only transaction charges which remained payable as on 31.03.2009 can be disallowed under section 40(a)(ia). He further submitted that the aforesaid decision of Special Bench in the case of Merilyn shipping (supra) is no more a good law in view of the decision of Guj. H.C. in the case of Sikander Khan Tunvar. He thus submitted that the order of Assessing Officer be upheld. 8. The learned A.R. fairly agreed to the submissions made by learned D.R. 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the Hon. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons that no disallowance is called for in absence of any nexus between exempted income and expenditure incurred having brought on record. Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted disallowance made under invoking section 14A r w r 8D of the Act. 12. Before us, the ld. A.R. reiterated the submissions made before A.O and CIT. The ld. D.R. on the other hand lied on the order of A.O. 13. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an undisputed fact that Assessee has earned Rs. 39,988/- as dividend income which has been claimed as exempt. Assessing Officer has worked out the disallowance by following the formula prescribed under Rule 8D of I.T. Rules. Assessing Officer has noted that the Assessee's banker was engage ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
