9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 780X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mind to the relevant material - such a contention could not have been raised as the assessee had clearly disclosed the entire record – thus, the reopening on this ground is not maintainable. The assessee has furnished the details of the deductions of tax in respect of which he had claimed expenditure - it has deducted tax at source u/s 194J of the Act and a statement giving details was also enclosed - It is not contended that any information in this regard had not been disclosed - It is not suggested that the deduction had not been made in respect of any item other than that mentioned in the said query-sheet – the assessee stated that it had deducted tax on Demat charges - it is not contended that any material had been withheld or that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner wrongly claimed deduction in respect of the security transaction tax. As far as first part of the notice is concerned, it is alleged that the Petitioner had not deducted tax on the following payments : i) Transaction Charges Rs.73.71 lacs ii) Repairs and Maintenance Rs.45.76 lacs iii) Arbitrage Rs.64.13 lacs iv) Demat charges paid Rs.61.09 lacs Total Rs.244.69 lacs 5. Before dealing with each of the items, it is important to note, as stated in paragraph 7 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Year in question. Mr Mody, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, however, established that in any event, the Assessing Officer had raised queries in respect of each of the items, the Petitioner had responded to each of them in writing and the Assessment Order was passed under section 143(3) only after consideration of the same. 7.(A) Re : Item No.2 of the querysheet reads as follows: 02. Whether TDS has been deducted on the Transaction charges of Rs.1,07,10,760/- paid to NSE and if not why the expenses should not be disallowed? (B) The Petitioner, by its letter dated 19th November 2007 furnished monthwise and partywise details of the transaction charges for the year ended 31st March 2005 as per Annexure 2 there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s ground therefore is not maintainable. 8. (A)Re: Item No.4 of the querysheet reads as under : 4. It is seen that repairs and maintenance of Rs.45,76,256 has been paid towards hardware, network and software. You are requested to give the nature of payments made in connection with the above repairs and maintenance charges and state whether the TDS has been deducted and why the payment should not be treated as capital in nature and disallowed. (B) The Petitioner by its letter dated 19th November 2007 furnished monthwise and partywise details of repairs and maintenance, Equipment Expenses (Hardware, Network Software) for the year ended 31st March 2005. Further, by their letter dated 21st November 2007, the Petitioner furnished recon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . In case, TDS is not deducted please explain why the same should not be disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia). (B) By the letter dated 28th December 2007, the Petitioner stated that it had deducted tax on Demat charges and enclosed a statement in respect thereto. Even in this regard it is not contended by the Respondents that any material had been withheld or that the tax not being deducted in respect of any payment other than the mentioned in the statement. The proposed reopening in this regard is therefore not sustainable. 11. (A) Re: Item No.7 of the querysheet which reads as under : 07. It is observed that you have claimed tax rebate u/s 88E at Rs.27,99,986/. In this respect, it may be noted that STT has come into effect only from 1.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
