9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... curred for the purposes of business, therefore, deductible under Section 37(1) of the Act. As the above position, as held by the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal, is self evident from the provisions of law. TDS liability - Held that:- ITAT was justified in upholding the order of the Ld CIT(A) and deleting the disallowance made by the A.O. as the assessee is required not to deduct TDS on Rent u/s.194I, on salary u/s.192 and watch and ward expenditure u/s.194C as the same is not paid in lieu of contractual agreement between a security agency and the assessee. No substantial question of law. - Income Tax Appeal No. 847 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 14-10-2016 - M. S. Sanklecha And S. C. Gupte, JJ. Mr. Suresh Kumar with Ms. Samiksha Kanani fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of bill in the invoice is the aggregate of brokerage and applicable service taxes thereon. During the subject assessment year, some of the clients of the Respondent-Assessee did not pay the service tax as required in terms of the invoice for onward payment to the Government of India. In these circumstances, the Respondent-Assessee paid the service tax payable under the Finance Act, 1994 out of its own resources and claimed the same as deduction under Section 37(1) of the Act. The Assessing Officer by Assessment Order dated 3 November 2011 disallowed the claim for deduction on the above account holding that the obligation to pay the service tax is on the customer / client and the same cannot be shifted to the Respondent-Assessee. (b) In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and and penalty proceedings under the Finance Act, 1994. Therefore, as rightly found by the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal, the payment is on account of expediency, exclusively and wholly incurred for the purposes of business, therefore, deductible under Section 37(1) of the Act. As the above position, as held by the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal, is self evident from the provisions of law. (e) In the above view, the question, as proposed, does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, not entertained. 4. Regarding Question (B) : (a) Mr.Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel for the Respondent very fairly states that the impugned order of the Tribunal has followed its order in the Respondent-Assessee's own case for Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
