9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plated under section 194C of the I.T. Act, 1961. There is no material on record to demonstrate that the impugned payments constituted payments for carrying out of any work within the meaning of section 194C. of the Act. The Assessing Officer has not asserted that there was any contract between the appellant and the above individuals for providing services as camera attendants. Engaging some persons on 'ad-hoc' basis or 'as and when required' basis, in my view, cannot be equated to a contract contemplated u/s 194C of the I.T. Act, 1961. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, hold that the AO was not justified invoking section 40(a)(ia) and making impugned disallowance. - Decided in favour of assessee Payment of in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : Sh. M.K. Jain Sr. DR For the Respondent : None ORDER Per S. V. Mehrotra, A. M This is revenue s appeal against the order dated 22.10.2013, passed by the ld. CIT(A)-XXXII, New Delhi in appeal no. 135/ 2013-14, relating to A.Y. 2010-11. 2. None put in appearance on behalf of the assessee at the hearing. The notice of hearing sent to assessee at the address furnished in column no. 11 of form no. 36 has been returned unserved with the postal remarks no such firm . Under these circumstances we proceed to dispose of the departmental appeal, ex parte, qua the assessee and in that process we have heard ld. DR and perused the material available on record. 3. Brief facts of the case are that assessee had filed return declari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... discharged before filing of the statutory service tax return . 5. The AO, however, did not accept the assessee s contention and made a disallowance of ₹ 46,11,914/-, inter alia, observing that assessee itself had admitted that it had committed fault of late filing the service tax return and late deposits of TDS, Income tax and service tax. 6. Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the assessee s appeal. Being aggrieved the department is in appeal before us and has taken following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts of the case in deleting the addition of ₹ 4,25,300/- made by AO on account of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T.Act,1961. 2. That the Commissioner o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tendants. The appellant has explained that these payments were made to camera attendants hired on ad-hoc basis and therefore TDS provisions were not applicable as it was a payment to persons engaged on 'ad-hoc' and 'as and when required' basis. On considering the facts of the case, I agree with the appellant that the payments to the persons engaged on 'ad-hoc' basis do not fall within the expression 'work' for the purposes of section 194C of the I.T. Act, 1961. The appellant has incurred the impugned expenditure on account of engaging some camera attendants on ad-hoc basis i.e. for a day or two or as and when required basis. Obviously, an activity of engaging some camera attendants for using them in the busin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case, finding given by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order and the written submissions of the appellant. I have also perused the case laws relied upon by the appellant in support of its case and case laws cited by the Assessing Officer in favour of his finding. It ,has been now been well settled that the interest paid for delayed payments of certain types of taxes and imposts e.g. cess, purchase tax, sales tax etc. is a deductible item of expenditure. On considering the facts of appellant's case in the light of the various case laws relied upon by it, I find that the expenditure in respect of payments of interest on late deposit of service tax is an allowable business expenditure incurred by the appellant for the purpo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
