9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aid by the payee, no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was called for in the hands of the payer for default in taxes deduction at source. DR was unable to convert this factual finding of the ld.CIT(A) that the payer in the impugned case had paid taxes on the impugned sum involved and the certificate, as per Rule 31ACB of IT Rules 1962,certifying the aforesaid fact, had been filed to the AO. He was also unable to controvert or distinguish the decision relied upon by the ld.CIT(A) in the case of Ansal Landmark Township Ltd. (supra). No reason to interfere in the order of the ld.CIT(A) deleting disallowance by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. - ITA No.1416 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s under: 1. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs.1,97,194/- u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act made by the AO. 5. As is evident, the sole issue for adjudication relates to the disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act of Rs.1,97,194/- on account of non-deduction of tax at source. The ld.CIT(A) dealt with the issue and deleted the impugned disallowance at para 3.3 of hisorder as under: 3.3. I have carefully considered the facts of the case, assessment order and submission of the appellant. The Assessing Officer has made the addition of Rs.1,97,194/- on the ground that appellant has not deducted IDS on the processing fee of loan of Rs.1,21,00,000/- taken from India Infoline Invest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e had filed the stipulated certificate as per Rule 31ACB of the Income Tax Rules certifying the fact of taxes have been paid by the payee (India Infoline Investment Services Ltd. in the present case) on the impugned payment. The ld.CIT(A) thereafter noted that Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Landmark Township Ltd., 61 taxmann.com 45 has held that in such circumstances, where taxes are shown to have been paid by the payee, no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was called for in the hands of the payer for default in taxes deduction at source. The ld.CIT(A) followed several other judgments laying down similar ratio,both of the Hon ble High Courts and the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench also as noted in para 3.3. above. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
