9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1543X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t ground agitates the disallowance of transaction charges allowed by the assessee, a company in the business of share broking, to Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) (Rs.4,42,512/-). The same stands effected u/s. 40(a)(ia) due to the non-deduction of tax at source thereon, relying on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Kotak Securities Ltd. [2012] 340 ITR 333 (Bom), which holds the transaction charges paid to stock exchanges as exigible to tax deduction at source u/s.194-J, so that non-deduction thereof would attract section 40(a)(ia). The disallowance would stand, thus, deferred to the year of deduction and deposit of the tax at source to the credit of the Central Government. The assessee, on the other hand, relies on the decision in the case of D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question is if the tax cannot be recovered (by the Department) from the assessees, how would the condition of section 40(a)(ia) be met by the assesseepayers? It is this dichotomy that stands highlighted by the tribunal in Jamnadas Khusaldas & Co. (supra). The decision by the tribunal in Mape Securities (P.) Ltd. (supra) is again based on the payment of tax on the relevant sum by the payee itself. Further, the law has since been amended, addressing the said dichotomy, so that where the payee furnishes a certificate to the effect that tax on the impugned sum stands deposited, the payer would not be deemed to be in default, saving the rigor of section 40(a)(ia). Though the said amendment stands made by Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. April 1, 2013, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he extent of Rs. 1,23,473/- was counted doubly while depositing the tax, did not find favour with him. Before the ld. CIT(A), who also called for a remand report, the assessee's claim was that this amount was, as a measure of precaution, deposited ad hoc in excess, pending the audit of the accounts. The first appellate authority confirmed the addition as the assessee was not able to reconcile the difference, i.e., between the brokerage income as per books of account and that on which tax stood deposited. He, accordingly, confirmed the addition, so that, aggrieved, the assessee is in second appeal. 5. The parties were heard, and the material on record perused. The controversy, in my view, is much ado about nothing. The assessee claiming to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 81 (Bom) . 7. The parties stand heard, and the material on record perused. Without doubt, the disallowance u/s. 14A is only of the expenditure incurred. However, when the assessee claims to have not incurred any expenditure, it is it on which the onus to exhibit the same lies. The law prescribes the said exhibition to be with reference to its accounts (section 14A(2) r/w s. 14A(3)), so that where not so done, the prescription of rule 8D shall apply. In the present case, the disallowance is not qua any direct expenditure or indirect interest expenditure, but qua indirect, administrative expenditure, covered under rule 8D(2)(iii). No material has been led even before the tribunal to show that no administrative expenditure, i.e., relating (di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
