9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 959X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that from the sample of Air waybill that Airlines had shown, the name of the assessee which had been reimbursed to the assessee by the agent and handling charges have been separately billed by the agent. Ld. CIT(A) has also found that circular in the present case was not applicable as there are two separate invoices, one issued in respect of reimbursement of charges and other for service charges of the agent. No contrary material has been brought on record to dislocate aforementioned findings recorded by Ld. CIT(A). - Decided against revenue - I .T.A. No. 4755/MUM/2012 - - - Dated:- 26-8-2013 - SHRI I.P. BANSAL, JM AND SHRI SANJAY ARORA, AM For the Appellant: Mrs. Bhavana Yashroy For the Respondent : Shri Reepal G. Tralshaw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee is engaged in the business of export trade in fabrics and garments. During the course of assessment proceedings the AO noticed that assessee did not deduct tax on freight and clearing forwarding charges of ₹ 63,48,415/- (Rs.61,72,427/- on account of freight and ₹ 1,75,988/- on account of clearing and forwarding charges). According to AO the assessee was required to deduct tax on these amounts under the provisions of section 194C of the Act. The AO noticed that the recipient has made two separate bills (i) for agency charges service tax and (ii) freight and other charges in respect of respective shipments. According to AO merely showing two separate bills, cannot substantiate assessee s contention that freight charges ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) The bill wise details of reimbursement of expenses and service charges were submitted before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment. Out of the rest of addition of ₹ 1,75,988/-, Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of ₹ 29,700/- and has sustained an addition of ₹ 1,46,288/- The department is aggrieved, hence, filed aforementioned appeal. 3. After narrating the facts Ld. DR relied upon Circular No.715 issued by CBDT dated 8/8/1995. She pleaded that addition has wrongly been deleted by Ld. CIT(A), his order should be set aside and that of AO be restored. 4. On the other hand, Ld. AR submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition. He submitted that similar issue was considered in the following dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... service charges of the agent. No contrary material has been brought on record to dislocate aforementioned findings recorded by Ld. CIT(A). The decisions relied upon by Ld. AR support the case of the assessee. The relevant observation of the Tribunal from the case of M/s. Om Satya Exim Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO (supra) are reproduced below: 7. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below and the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the assessee. We have also considered Board circular dated 8- 8-1975, copy of which has been submitted by the learned DR of the Revenue. In the present case, it has been submitted before us by the learned AR that the commission agent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
