9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 318X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee - Held that:- The assessee claimed that actually TDS was paid and there was no case of non-payment of TDS because on processing of TDS statement it was wrongly shown as nonpayment of TDS. This mistake has been occurred due to mismatch of CIN number registered in the OLTAS statement and the CIN number mentioned by the assessee. The revised TDS statement after rectifying the mistake in CIN number could not be submitted because of technical reason as the online system was not allowing the processing of TDS statement for financial year 2006-07. Therefore, the assessee has simultaneously applied to the assessing officer for rectification of the order passed. It is also stated that the annexure to the order of the assessing officer provides list of challans reported in the return but not found in the OLTAS. CIT(A) has directed the assessing officer to verify from the bank as to whether the claim of the assessee having deposited the amount through challan are correct or not. - decided against revenue - ITA No. 2251/Ahd/2013, ITA No. 2104/Ahd/2014 - - - Dated:- 17-9-2018 - Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member And Ms. Madhumita Roy, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri M.K. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee. The relevant part of the decision of ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under:- The Hon ble ITAT D Bench, Ahmedabad in its above order has restored back the matter to the file of A.O. by directing that the Eimco Elecon (India) Ltd. shall bring on record the relevant bills raised by the C F Agent and it has to be shown with exact amount of expenditure incurred by each agent was reimbursed by the appellant and bills were separately raised by the C F Agent for reimbursement of each expenditure and for service charges payable to them. The Hon'ble ITAT D Bench, Ahmedabad has directed the AO that if the arjgeJIant J,e.Eimco -Elecon (India) Ltd. is able to establish these two ingredients, then section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is not applicable in respect of reimbursement of expenditure. From this decision of the Hon'ble ITAT D Bench, Ahmedabad it can be said that in case if exact amount of expenditure incurred by CHA has been reimbursed by the appellant and bills are separately raised by the CHA for reimbursement of each expenditure and for service charges payable to them and if it is established by the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se law. The sole issue in the present case is that of TDS deduction. The assessee paid gross amount of ₹ 16,56,989/- to M/s ETPl, its clearing and forwarding agent. It deducted TDS qua a sum of ₹ 5,23,855/-. The balance amount in question of ₹ 11,33,134/- was stated to be reimbursement of miscellaneous expenditure only. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the same had to be subjected to TDS u/s. 194C of the Act even in case of reimbursement. The CIT(A) adopts a different view in the impugned assessment to that in the preceding assessment year for holding that no TDS is required to be deducted in case of reimbursements in question since there is no income element embedded therein. However, he holds that the assessee s ship line bills etc. are to be subjected to TDS. We find this latter observation to be not correct. The assessee s stand throughout has been that such shipping payments do not require TDS deduction as per the Boards Circular No. 723 dated 01-09-1995 excluding operation of the relevant TDS provisions. Both the lower authorities fail to rebut this contention on facts and law. We accordingly hold that the CIT(A) erred in directing the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition made by the assessing officer. The relevant part of the decision of ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under:- 5.2. I have gone through the facts of the case, the AO's observations and the submission made by the AR. So far as ground no. '3' is concerned, the appellant's contentions that no order u/s. 201 for the F.Y. 2006-07 could have been passed after 31/03/2011 is correct. Accordingly, the order of the Assessing Officer declaring the appellant as assessee in default for amount deducted but not paid is directed to be deleted as being time barred. 5.2.1 But so far as order u/s. 201(1A), vide which the Assessing Officer has levied interest on the amount of IDS allegedly not paid by the appellant to the credit of the Central Government, is concerned, no time limit for passing such order has been provided in the IT Act, 1961. Hence, it is held that the Assessing Officer has rightly levied such interest on the appellant. 5.2.2 So far as ground no. '2' is concerned, on perusal of the order of the Assessing Officer it is seen that the TDS/TCS deposited by the appellant vide the ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umber registered in the OLTAS statement and the CIN number mentioned by the assessee. The revised TDS statement after rectifying the mistake in CIN number could not be submitted because of technical reason as the online system was not allowing the processing of TDS statement for financial year 2006-07. Therefore, the assessee has simultaneously applied to the assessing officer for rectification of the order passed. It is also stated that the annexure to the order of the assessing officer provides list of challans reported in the return but not found in the OLTAS. In view of the above the ld. CIT(A) has directed the assessing officer to verify from the bank as to whether the claim of the assessee having deposited the amount through challan are correct or not. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the copy of appeal giving effect to the CIT(A) s order passed by the assessing officer on 18th June, 2014 was furnished as per which the assessing officer had granted reduction after necessary verification carried out as directed by the Ld.CIT(A). Looking to the above facts and circumstances, we do not find any merit in the appeal of the revenue , therefore, the same is d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
