9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 808X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact was not disputed by the revenue. The Tribunal on an appreciation of the evidence on record has concurred with the findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals). It is not the case of the revenue that the findings recorded by the Tribunal are based on irrelevant material or that any relevant material has been ignored. Under the circumstances, the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal being based upon concurrent findings of fact recorded by it, in the absence of any perversity therein, do not give rise to any question of law much less, a substantial question of law as proposed or otherwise. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. - Decided against revenue. - Tax Appeal No. 569 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 8-9-2015 - Harsha Devani ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revenue and partly allowed the assessee's appeal. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of its appeal, revenue has preferred the present appeal. 3. Mr. M.R. Bhatt, senior advocate, learned counsel for the appellant assailed the impugned order by reiterating the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer. 4. This court has considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and has perused the impugned order passed by the Tribunal as well as the orders passed by the lower authorities. 5. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the order dated 12th March, 2012 has recorded the following findings:- 3.5 I have considered the facts of the case; assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e deduction of tax. Therefore Non-deduction of tax will not result in any disallowance. 3 payment to Indian agent of non-resident shipping company will also not require deduction of tax at source and accordingly non-deduction will not result in any disallowance. The assessing officer, in the remand proceeding did not examine the issue from the available documents whether TDS was required to be deducted or not. AO only called for some more documents which could not be submitted by the appellant since appellant did not possess the same. Assessing Officer did not examine whether payments were made to agent of the non-resident shipping company or Indian shipping company in the capacity of shipping line. Therefore the verification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of shipping Corporation of India Ltd, appellant submitted no deduction certificate issued by DCIT. TDS by order dated 15-04-2004 for assessment year 2005-06. In view of this, appellant was not required to deduct TDS in respect of payments made to Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. Accordingly there was no violation of TDS provisions in the case of payments to shipping Corporation of India Ltd. Therefore the disallowance of payment made to shipping Corporation cannot be made. However there is no such certificate in the case of other two Shipping companies whom total payment of RS 2574072 and ₹ 308429 were made without deducting TDS. Therefore appellant violated the provisions of section 194C in respect of payments made to ORI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
