9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1591X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee to say that did not furnish all the particulars or it has disclosed inaccurate particulars so as to say that assessee is liable for concealment penalty. Keeping in view the entirety of facts and also reasonable belief of the assessee that it is not entitled for deduction of tax on the payments made to him by it as the same were excluded from the definition of "work" by the Explanation to section 194C, we are of the opinion that levy of concealment penalty in the present case is not justified and deserves to be deleted. Accordingly, the penalty is deleted and appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.2955/MUM/2013 - - - Dated:- 25-5-2015 - I P Bansal, JM And Rajendra, AM,JJ. For the Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quality analysis report of diamonds; Files with new punch printed/reprinted files etc. 3.1 Similarly, payments have been made to M/s. Dwarkesh Enterprises aggregating to ₹ 2,71,071/-, which includes payment made for jewellery design book;A4 size Certificate; A4 size terms and conditions; A4 size colour letterhead; I-Card for Delhi; diamond diamond grading book; jewellery design book; Terms and conditions; cash credit voucher; Voucher book etc. 3.2 Thus, it has been held by AO that an aggregate sum of ₹ 6,06,879/- was to be added to the income of the assessee under the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act as assessee did not deduct tax upon the aforementioned payments. The assessee did not contest this addition to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l/2011, copy of the said order was placed on our record and was also given to Ld. DR. In the said decision, considering the definition of work given in Explanation to section 194C it was held by Tribunal that if the payments are made for the manufacture or supply of products which are manufactured according to the requirements or specifications of the customer by using material purchased from a person other than such customer, then the assessee was not under an obligation to deduct the tax as payments made by the assessee would not fall within the ambit of work contract defined in section 194C of the Act. 4.1 It was also submitted BY Ld. AR that for the additions made under section 40(a) (ia), penalty could not be levied as per decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
