9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 804X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is further noted that payments have actually been received in two separate financial years and not in the current year and assessee also booked expenditure with reference to the payments made in the two financial years. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition in dispute which does not need any interference on our part, therefore, we uphold the action of the CIT(A) on the issue in dispute and reject the ground raised by the Revenue. - I.T.A. No. 694/DEL/2016 - - - Dated:- 13-2-2019 - SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Revenue : Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. Dr. For The Assessee : S h . Rakesh Aggarwal, CA ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Revenue has filed this A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /- was included in the assessment year 2013-14 then there would be loss of Rs. (-) 27488180/- in the assessment year 2013-14. Hence, the AO held that the assessee has not disclosed receipts of ₹ 2,89,17,000/- in the AY 2012-13 and therefore, the same was added to the income of the assessee by assessing the income at ₹ 3,30,49,768/- vide order dated 3.3.2015 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Against the assessment order, the assessee filed the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who vide his impugned order dated 26.11.2015 has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-7, New Delhi the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Ld. DR relied upon the Order of the AO and reiterated the content ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The balance amount of ₹ 2,89,17,000/- pertained to the period April to October, 2012 and was accordingly declared in the next assessment year i.e. A. Y. 2013- 14 and proportionate TDS of ₹ 6,37,909/- was claimed. 2.4. The transaction between the appellant and M/s Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd. is governed by Joint Promotional Activity Agreement which was effective for the period of one year i.e. November, 2011 to October, 2012. Services were to be rendered by the appellant on monthly basis over the entire tenure of 12 months. The appellant raised one lump sum invoice on account on 11.11.2011 for ₹ 5,46,77,916/- (inclusive of service tax). The services against the invoice were rendered during the 12 months period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unt in advance, it is stated by the AR that this claim was never made by the appellant company. Further, the amount receivable for the period April, 2012 to October, 2012 was shown as provision for advance billing in the balance sheet. As for AO s finding that TDS on full amount was deducted by M/s Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd. and therefore the corresponding income was taxable in the current year itself, the AO stated that even though TDS is deducted on full amount in a year, the credit of TDS is allowed in a year to which the income pertains. In the case of the appellant, the total basic amount of the bill for ₹ 49572000/- i.e.(5467916-5105916) service tax, the amount of ₹ 2,89,17,000/- pertained to the period in the next F. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... how the appellant was planning to escape tax in both assessment years as was held by the AO, which, is the basis for taxing the receipts of ₹ 2,89,17,000/- in the current year. In view of the above, the addition made by the AO is without any basis and is therefore ordered to be deleted. This ground of appeal is ruled in favour of the appellant. 6.1 After perusing the aforesaid findings of the Ld. CIT(A), we are of the view that AO has brought to tax revenue of ₹ 2,89,17,000/- in the current year primarily on the ground that DS of ₹ 10,93,559/- was deducted by M/s Sistema Shyam Teleservices Ltd. on the bill for entire amount invoice by the assessee in November, 2011. It is noted that the assessee had offered the recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
