9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 602X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a, Advs Per : N Kumar, J : This appeal is by the Revenue challenging the order passed by the Tribunal in Misc.Petition No.38/Bang/2012 dated 14.12.2012 rejecting the same on the ground that there is no mistake in the order in ITA No.104/Bang/2011 dated 20.12.2011, which warrants interference under Section 254(2) of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act', for short), 1961. 2. The a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed a report stating that the assessee has been incurring expenditure by way of commission to the drivers and the commission agents who were responsible for bringing the customers to the business premises of the assessee. The assessee was paying commission to the tune of 20% to 25%. In view of the said report submitted by the Assessing Officer, appeal was allowed and the dis-allowance was restored. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not be gone into, and accordingly, it was dismissed. Aggrieved by the said order, the Revenue is before this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the Revenue submits, the question whether TDS was deductable or not is purely a question of law. Even though it was not raised before the lower Authorities, it could be raised now and therefore, the Tribunal was in error in dismissing the Misc. Petition. 4. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... setting aside the original order. 6. On perusal of the order, it discloses that all they want is setting aside of the order passed in Misc. Petition and that if that application is allowed, consequently, the original order is to be set aside. This is not an appeal against the original order. In that view of the matter, we do not see any merit in this appeal. No substantial question of law is inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
