9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id to NBFC - Addition on the ground that the tax has not been deducted at source in respect of these payments - HELD THAT:- By filing certificates from Karvy Financial Service and Cholamandalam Investment Finance Co. Ltd., the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the recipients have declared the income and paid tax. Since the above certificates were not produced before the authorities below, we direct the assessee to produce the same before the Assessing Officer for verification and allow the deduction in view of the decision in the case of CIT v. Ansal Land Mark Township P. Ltd. [ 2015 (9) TMI 79 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No. 200/Chny/2020 - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itted that the above amounts were remitted within the due date of filing the return and the same should be allowed as deduction. Further, the ld. Counsel for the assessee strongly relied on the Division Bench decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT v. Industrial Security Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd. in TCA Nos. 585 and 586 of 2015 vide order dated 24.07.2015 and also submitted that the decision followed by the ld. CIT(A) is Single Judge Bench against the writ application, should not have been applied since the same was dismissed subsequently by the Division Bench of the Hon ble High Court and prayed for deleting the disallowance by following the Division Bench decision in the case of CIT v. Industrial Security In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le Madras High Court. Therefore, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) cannot be held as valid. 5.1 We have perused the above decision in the case of CIT v. Industrial Security Intelligence India Pvt. Ltd. (supra), wherein, the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court has upheld the decision of the ITAT, in which the assessee was allowed to claim as a deduction the deposit of employee's contribution towards Provident Fund and ESI after due date as prescribed under the relevant Act, but before the due date of filing of Return of Income under the Income Tax Act. 5.2 Further, section 43B overrides section 36(1)(va) of the Act because the provisions states Notwithstanding anything contained in any other provisions contained in this Act, a de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 6. The next ground raised in the grounds of appeal (3 3.1) of the assessee relates to confirmation of disallowance of expenses claimed by the assessee towards lease rent [₹.13,56,505/-] and interest paid to NBFC [₹.24,09,046/-] aggregating to ₹.37,65,551/- on the ground that the tax has not been deducted at source in respect of these payments. 6.1 Since the assessee has not deducted the lease rent for ₹.13,56,505/-, the Assessing Officer disallowed the expenses and brought to tax. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance on the ground that no evidence of payee obtaining certificate under section 197 for non-deduction has been produced. 6.2 Bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r to examine and decide the issue afresh as to whether the recipient is having exemption under section 10(23BBA) of the Act or if the recipient has offered the rental receipt to tax so that the assessee is entitled to claim deduction after affording one more opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 6.4 With regard to non-deduction of TDS on interest paid to NBFC loans, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee has paid interest of ₹.1,03,86,583/- on loans to Cholamandalam Finance and HDFC Bank. The assessee claimed that TDS on interest paid to NBFC need not be deducted as per the amendment in the Finance Act, 2012. Since the amendment takes effect on 01.07.2012 and no TDS was deducted for the interest paid for three months ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
