9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Act w.e.f. 01.06.1994 - HELD THAT:- The assessee is a subsidiary of holding company entered into lease agreement and applicable tax deducted at source by depositing thereon. As the assessee was occupying part of the said rented property and reimbursing its holding company towards rent partially. In the present case, the assessee is paying rent to the holding company as reimbursement since last couple of years. This position has been accepted by the department all through and it has been never disputed even when provisions for TDS were inserted on statute since 1994, section 194-I of the Act was inserted in Act w.e.f. 01.06.1994. Similarly, this position was not disputed even after amendment in section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appeals, NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the ld. CIT(A) ]. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. On the facts of the case and in law, the appellate order under section 250 read with section 251 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) under National Faceless Appeal Centre ( NFAC ) (hereinafter referred to as CIT(A) ) is erroneous on facts and bad in law. Corporate Tax 2. Disallowance of rent expenses 2.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that expenses relating to rent reimbursed to holding company aggregating to Rs. 15,98,400/- do not qualify for deduction under the Act. 2.2. That on the facts and circu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epted by the department in the proceedings and subsequent assessment years and never disputed even when the provision for TDS inserted on the statute since 1994 by inserting section 194-I of the I.T. Act, 1961 was in Act w.e.f. 01.06.1994. Similarly, this position was also not disputed even after the amendment in section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Taxation Law (Amendment) Act, 2006 w.e.f. 01.04.2006. The ld. AR further contended that on this issue there is no material change in the facts and law during the year under consideration. As per the lease deed entered between subsidiary and holding company, which provided for use of the premises by the subsidiary companies and consequent to that actual payments made by the lessee (holding company ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and reimbursing its holding company towards rent partially. In the present case, the assessee is paying rent to the holding company as reimbursement since last couple of years. This position has been accepted by the department all through and it has been never disputed even when provisions for TDS were inserted on statute since 1994, section 194-I of the Act was inserted in Act w.e.f. 01.06.1994. Similarly, this position was not disputed even after amendment in section 40(a)(ia) of the Act by the Taxation Law (Amendment) Act, 2006 which is w.e.f. 01.04.2006. On this issue, there is no material change in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the law during the year under consideration. The ld. AR placed before us the copy of lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
