9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by Finance Act 2007 is applicable to the individual and HUF which states that there is a requirement of deduction of TDS w.e.f 01.06.2007. The specific amendment bringing HUF within the provision of section 194C (1) is made only from the said date and this implies that HUF are excluded from section 194C before 01.06.2007 and the same is not applicable in the case of the assessee during the year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the disallowance/addition made by the AO, we do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the impugned decision of the Ld.CIT(A) and therefore the same is upheld. - Decided against revenue X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77; 84,21,178/- u/s 40(a)(ia) as the assessee had not deducted TDS as per the provisions of section 194C of the Income Tax Act. On appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) deleted the impugned addition made by the AO by relying on the decisions of the ITAT in the case of Nasib Singh Vs. ACIT reported in 50 SOT 486 (Cuttack) and Mythri Transport Corporation Vs. ACIT (2010) 124 ITD 40. Aggrieved by the impugned order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ement of deduction of TDS w.e.f 01.06.2007. The specific amendment bringing HUF within the provision of section 194C (1) is made only from the said date and this implies that HUF are excluded from section 194C before 01.06.2007 and the same is not applicable in the case of the assessee during the year under consideration i.e. 2005-06. Secondly, the ITAT in the case of Nasib Singh (supra) has held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
