9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 266X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Toshoku Ltd [1980 (8) TMI 2 - SUPREME Court ] wherein held commission amounts which were earned by the non-resident assessees for services rendered outside India cannot, therefore, be deemed to be incomes which have either accrued or arisen in India, hence no TDS. Therefore, without going into the merits of the issue, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A)- Decided in favour of assessee Disallowance of car expenses - Held that:- AO had wrongly applied the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act as each of the cash payments considered by the AO were below ₹ 20,000/- - Decided in favour of assessee Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - payment for job work under various heads claiming them to be purchases and had not deducted TDS - Held that:- We find force in the submission of the ld. AR that if the AO had properly examined the vouchers, he would have found that they payments were actually for purchase of raw material and not for job work and subsequently he would not have proceeded to disallowed the same u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act by holding that no tax had been deducted. The ld. CIT(A) was quite justified ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed return of income on 31.10.2006 declaring an income of ₹ 79,43,660/-. Assessment was completed vide order dated 30.12.2008 u/s 143(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961 [for short, 'the Act'] assessing the income of the assessee at ₹ 1,45,24,520/- against the declared income of ₹ 79,43,660/-. Ground No. 1 4. Facts, in brief, are that the assessee purchased stock of ready fabric amounting to ₹ 42,35,250/- from M/s nath International, a sister concern of the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the issue of stock of transfer was exclusively examine by her in the assessment order of the said partnership firm M/s Nath International for the A.Y 2006-07. Following the view taken in that year, the AO was of the view that M/s Nath International did not have stock for further sale to the assessee and the same was nothing but a cash credit in the shape of stock to inflate the purchases of M/s Narayan Overseas. Accordingly, not satisfied with the explanation tendered by the assessee, the AO made addition of the aforementioned amount of ₹ 42,35,250/-. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) on this count. Ground No. 2 of the Revenue being devoid of merits is dismissed. Since the facts and circumstances of the case are exactly same and similar, respectfully following the same, we uphold the impugned order of the ld. CIT(A) on this count and dismiss ground No. 1 raised by the revenue. Ground No. 2 7. Vide ground No.2, the department has disputed the allowing of relief of ₹ 91,044/- to the assessee by the ld. CIT(A) which was made by the AO on account of excess claim of expenses booked for quilting job work done by one of the job worker namely M/s S.M. Creations. 8. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that there were certain discrepancies as per the copy of account in the books of M/s S.M. Creations and as per copy of account of S.M. Creations in the books of the assessee and hence made the addition of ₹ 91,044/- as excess expenditure claimed by the assessee. Aggrieved, when the assessee went in appeal before the first appellate authority, he directed the AO to delete the addition. Now the aggrieved Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal agains ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee are that on five occasions the assessee had incurred cash expenses in excess of ₹ 20,000/-. Therefore, the AO made disallowance of ₹ 29,257/- being 20% of total expenditure of ₹ 1,45,786/-. When the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), he got relief. Aggrieved, against this relief granted by the ld. CIT(A) to the assessee, the revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal. 13. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and carefully perused the relevant material placed on record before us. We find that the ld. CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that the AO had wrongly applied the provisions of section 40A(3) of the Act as each of the cash payments considered by the AO were below ₹ 20,000/-. The ld. CIT(A) has relied on the decision of the Orissa Hon'ble High Court in the case of Aloo Supply Company reported at 121 ITR 680 wherein it has been held that statutory limit of payment in cash applied to payment made to a party at a time. The ld. CIT(A) has also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Allabahad High Court in the case of KA Nek Mohd Sons Vs. CIT 135 ITR 501 in arriving at the conclusion. Therefore, we find that no pay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
