9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 938X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed by the assessee against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Mumbai (in short CIT(A) ) dated 1.10.2014 for A.Y 2008-09 on the following ground of appeal : 1. The learned CIT (Appeals) erred in dismissing the appeal filed against the order u/s 201(1)/201(A) of the Act raising a demand of ₹ 158144/-. In so doing she did not consider the evidence placed on record having regard to amended provisions of sec. 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of share broking and dealing in securities. During the course of assessment proceedings for the year under consideration by the ACIT, Range 4(1), it was noticed that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant is proceeded ex parte. On the other hand, the Ld. DR on behalf of the respondent is present in the court and is ready for argument, therefore, we have decided to decide the case on merits after going through the record as well as with the assistance of the Ld. DR. Ground no. 1 5. We have heard the Ld. DR on behalf of Revenue and also perused the record. We have noticed from the record that a similar disallowance made in the scrutiny assessment for preceding year, i.e., Assessment Year 2007-08 stood deleted by the CIT(A) and, therefore, reliance was placed upon the said order even before CIT(A). 6. We have also noticed that in the course of scrutiny of assessment u/s 143(3) the Assessing Officer disallowed assessee s claim for V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome Tax Appeal (L) No. 475 of 2011 dated 28-07-2011 to hold that the there is no requirement to deduct tax at source from the payments made to NSE/BSE towards VSAT charges and Lease line charges. The ld. AR submitted that in the case of Kotak Securities Ltd, the Bombay High Court did not consider VSAT and lease-line charges issue. Accordingly, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to delete this addition. 3. Since the disallowance so made by AO has itself been deleted, there is no reason for holding the assessee in default u/s 201(1)/201(1A). Accordingly we do not find any merit in the order passed by AO holding the assessee in default for non deduction of tax in respect of VSAT and lease line charges. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
