Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (9) TMI 1617

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urity and common area maintenance charges. These payments nowhere related to sec 194I maybe the same has been fixed on a Lum sum basis pm. For these charges the relation of assessee is not of lessor and lessee but of contractor and service taker, which falls in the category of as defined in sec 194C. We direct the A.O to delete the demands raised u/s 201(1) and 201(1A), after due verification - SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appellant : None For the Respondent : Sh. Tejinder Pal Singh, Sr. DR ORDER PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ( NFAC ] dated 27.12.20221 under section 2 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ring the course of survey, it was noticed that the assessee had paid Rs. 12, 98,373/-. The notice to assessee was issued on 12-Mar-2018 u/s 201(1)/201(1A) asking for copies of lease and licence agreement for F.Y 2010-11 along with the copies of the ledger accounts of the expenses on which provisions of TDS is attracted, acknowledgement of TDS return and TDS challan for the concerned F.Y. the case was fixed for hearing on 28-03-2018. Here it is pertinent to mention that case was getting time barred on 31-03-2018 and time given to assessee was insufficient to reply and to substantiate his matter. As the matter pertains to F.Y 2010-11 and proceedings were initiated on 26-03-2018 only. 3. There is a time lag of almost 7 years and notice was iss .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 208/- towards the same. So the figures as taken by A.O in his assessment order vis-a vis figures taken by Ld. CIT(A) in his appeal order vide pg no-3 are not matching. b. There is no breakup given by AO of the total amount amounting to Rs. 12,98,373/- which comes to Rs 1,08,198/- pm whereas as per the order Ld. CIT(A) this amount is Rs 13101/- pm. Both the amounts are not matching. c. Ld. CIT(A) given 3 figures towards licence repayable amounting to Rs. 36,247/-, again Rs. 36,247/- towards amenity charges and Rs. 13,101/- towards common area maintenance. The total of this figure comes to Rs. 85,595/-pm. and p.a total comes Rs. 10, 27,140/-. This figure nowhere matches with the figure of AO order amounting to Rs. 12, 98,373/-. Further Ld. CI .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates