9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 1102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave already been paid during the year previous year without deducting tax at source. AO is not justified in disallowing the expenditure. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is reversed. Thus, all the grounds of the assessee are allowed. - I.T.A. No. 136(Asr)/2012 - - - Dated:- 7-8-2012 - H. S. Sidhu (Judicial Member) And B. P. Jain (Accountant Member) For the Appellant : R. K. Gupta, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mounts which have already been paid during the previous year though without deduction of tax. 2. The appellant craves, leaves to alter and add to substitute any ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 3. The brie facts of the case are that the assessee is a dealer of M/s. Maruti Limited. The AO made a disallowance aof ₹ 15,60,000/- under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. CIT(DR), Sh. Laxman Singh, relied on the orders of the authorities below. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. The Ld. CIT(A) in the present case had made the disallowance, in the absence of the decision of Special Bench of ITAT Visakhapatnam in the case of M/s. Merilyn Shipping Transports, Visakhapatnam vs. AC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l as the facts in the case of M/s. Merilyn Shipping Transports, Visakhapatnam vs. ACIT Range-1, Visakhapatnam (supra). Therefore, following the decision of the Special Bench of ITAT Visakhapatnam in the case of M/s. Merilyn Shipping Transports, Visakhapatnam vs. ACIT Range-1, Visakhapatnam (supra), the AO is not justified in disallowing the expenditure. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
