9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 643X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case CIT Vs. M/s Vector Shipping Services Pvt. Ltd.(2013 (7) TMI 622 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT ) and this Bench decision in various cases we delete the disallowance - Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 395/JP/2014 - - - Dated:- 24-2-2016 - SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM For The Assessee by : Shri Manish Agarwal (CA) For The Revenue : Shri O.P. Bhateja (Addl.CIT) ORDER PER T.R. MEENA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 04/04/2014 of the learned CIT(A)-II, Jaipur for A.Y. 2009-10.The effective grounds of appeal are as under:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld CIT(A) has grossly erred in sustaining disallowance of ₹ 1,74,575/- (Bei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e total expenses under different heads. The Assessing Officer analysed the trading result and after analyzing the evidence produced by the assessee, he disallowed 20% out of vehicle running and maintenance expenses, office and staff welfare expenses and site expenses on the ground that the claim of self made vouchers and personal expenses not verifiable. The total addition was made under the head vehicle running and maintenance expenses at ₹ 59,543/-, office and staff welfare expenses at ₹ 59,527/- and in the site expenses at ₹ 2,30,079, which was challenged by the assessee before the ld CIT(A), who had partly allowed by the appeal by restricting the addition @ 10%. 3. Now the assessee is in appeal before us. It is subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out specific defects in claiming of expenses under all the heads. They made general observations. It is also a fact that under these heads, full bills cannot be obtained from the service provider, which is not verifiable. Therefore, in the interest of the justice, we restrict this addition @ 5%. The Assessing Officer is directed to calculate the disallowances accordingly. 6. The 2nd ground of the appeal is against confirming the disallowance of ₹ 15,79,723/- U/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ld Assessing Officer observed that the assessee made payments on account of interest to the following NBFCs on which TDS was not deducted, which is reproduced as under:- Sl.No. Name of the party to whom interest p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 40(a)(ia) of the Act on payment of ₹ 15,79,723/-. The Assessing Officer provided opportunity on it, the assessee submitted that Section 40(a)(ia) applied only when the amount is payable and no where expenditure is paid for which he relied Hon ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench decision in the case of Jaipur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Vs. DCIT 123 TTJ 888. After considering the assessee s factual and legal argument, it has been held by the Assessing Officer that Section 40(a)(ia) is applicable on paid as well as payable. Any payment made by the assessee is paid only after it becomes payable and from the date he takes the loan and thus invoking two separate of the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia). Thus, he made addition of ₹ 15,79,723/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided the issue categorically against the appellant by holding that disallowance of the section 40(a)(ia) is applicable in respect of non-deduction or delayed payment of TDS for both amounts paid as well as payable. Therefore position is quite clear now and accordingly the disallowance of interest made by the AO on account of non-deduction of TDS is justified. Accordingly, the disallowance made by the AO is confirmed. 8. Now the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee had paid ₹ 15,79,723/- to various NBFCs as on 31/3/2009, no amount of interest was payable. The Special Bench of ITAT in the case of Merilyn Shipping Transport Vs. ACIT 16 ITR (Trib) 1 wherein it has been held th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
