9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (7) TMI 437X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax (Appeals) considering the submissions of the assessee where the assessee submitted that evidences were produced and these expenses were incurred for levelling the access road to a property which was sold from which commission income was also returned by the assessee. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) also considered that invoices are self-made. Considering these submissions, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) restricted the disallowance to 50% of ₹ 7,60,150/- to ₹ 3,80,075/-. On reading of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), we do not find any good reason to interfere with the same. - Decided against Revenue. - I.T.A.No.1372/Mds/2013 - - - Dated:- 13-2-2015 - Shri A.Mohan Alankamony And Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e made by the assessee by the end of the accounting year, in view of various decisions of High Courts on this issue. 4. Departmental Representative supports the order of the Assessing Officer in disallowing the architect fees for nondeduction of TDS. 5. On going through the orders of lower authorities, and the decisions of this Tribunal, we find that the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee inasmuch as the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) have no application when the amounts were paid by the assessee before the end of the accounting year. The co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ITO Vs. Theekathir Press (supra) held as under:- 2. In the present case, the Assessing Officer has disallowed the claim of certain ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Income-tax appearing for the Revenue has relied on three other judgments rendered by the Hon ble Calcutta High Court and Gujarat High Court, in which their Lordships have held that the law stated by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Merilyn Shipping Transports vs. Addl.CIT was not acceptable. The Hon ble Calcutta High Court, through their judgment delivered on 3rd April, 2013 in ITA No.20 of 2013 in the case of CIT vs. Crescent Export Syndicates, has held that the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Merilyn Shipping Transports vs. Addl.CIT is not acceptable. The same view has again been repeated by the Hon ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Md. Jakir Hossain Mondal, throu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue. 7. The next issue in the appeal of the Revenue is that Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in allowing relief of ₹ 3,80,075/- towards land levelling expenses. The Assessing Officer while completing the assessment noticed that assessee has debited ₹ 15,20,300/- in the profit and loss account towards sand charges. The assessee was required to produce evidence in support of the said expenditure. But the assessee did not comply with the request of the Assessing Officer. Therefore in the absence of any proper evidences furnished by the assessee, 50% of the charges amounting to ₹ 7,60,150/- was disallowed by the Assessing Officer. On appeal, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) considering the submissions of assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
