9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1000X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice,the matter should be restored back to the file of the AO for verification purposes. He is directed to verify the claims made by the assessee in light of the cases relied upon by the assessee before us with regard to the sub contract payment and interest payments.With regard to payment of TDS on professional fee he would follow the decision of the Special Bench delivered in the case of Merlyn Shipping and Transport (2012 (4) TMI 290 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM). - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. - ITA No.8404/Mum/2010 - - - Dated:- 4-9-2015 - Sh. Rajendra and Parthasarathy Choudhury, JJ. For The Assessee : Shri Vijay Mehta For The Revenue : Shri S.R. Walimbe Order PER RAJENDRA, AM Challenging ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me Tax (Appeal) erred in confirming the addition made under section 40(a)(ia) though provision of said section does not applicable. (4) Without prejudice to above, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not considering the modification in the original ground No.2 for which request was made by the appellant vide letter dated 10 th August 2010 during the course of hearing. In the original ground the appellant had by mistake taken the amount of addition of ₹ 2,64,03,867/- instead of actual addition of ₹ 2,68,02,688/-. (5) The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not accepting the fact that the appellant had deducted TDS only on insistence by the auditor and it does not amount to acceptance of the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment of TDS in time.During the assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee had made subcontract payments, interest and professional charges on which TDS deducted was paid into the Central Govt. account beyond the due date prescribed by the provisions of Chapter XVII of the Act,that the total payment made into Govt. account in time under the head sub-contract and interest worked out to ₹ 2.86 crores,(Rs.2.85 crores on account of sub contract +Rs.1.68 crores on account of interest paid), that assessee had not deducted tax at source on professional charges amounting to ₹ 4.00 lacs.He further observed that TDS deduction on payment in month of March amounting of ₹ 2,273/- was paid to the Govt. account before the due ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ubmission of the assessee and the assessment order,the FAA held that the facts regarding the payment of sub contract charges, interest and professional fee as debited to its P L account was not denied or disputed by it ,that the submission made by the assessee about sub-contract charges were not acceptable, that it was awarded the contract by various Govt, agencies based on tenders filed during the relevant A.Y, that it had participated in the tender process and same were awarded to it, that it had acted as a contractor by allocating a sub-contract to different agencies or parties for successful completion of the contracts, that it was required to deduct TDS as per provisions of Section 194C(2) of the Act, that the it had deducted the tax b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... date of filing of return.As far as TDS about interest payment and professional fees are concerned,we find that the assessee has not made any submission before the FAA, however, before us it was stated that payment was made before the due date of filing of return or that amounts had been paid by the assessee before the end of the previous year. We are of the opinion that,in the interest of justice,the matter should be restored back to the file of the AO for verification purposes. He is directed to verify the claims made by the assessee in light of the cases relied upon by the assessee before us with regard to the sub contract payment and interest payments.With regard to payment of TDS on professional fee he would follow the decision of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
