TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 172X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of infrastructure and trading facilities provided by the stock exchange and cannot be said to be a fee paid in consideration of the stock exchange rendering any technical or managerial services to the assessee. The provisions of section 194J are not attracted. - Consequently, the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) are not attracted . See The Income Tax Commissioner Mumbai City 4 vs. Angel Capital & D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s: A Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 claimed by the assessee firm being VSAT charges amounting to Rs.3,12,597/and NSE lease line charges amounting to Rs.1,66,301/and Transaction charges of Rs.4,45,024/paid by the Assessee Firm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 3 As regards the second question is concerned, the finding of fact recorded by the CIT (A) and upheld by the ITAT is that the payments made by the Assessee to the Stock Exchange for violation of their regulation are not an account of an offence or which is prohibited by law. Hence, the invocation of explanation to section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is not justified. In our opinion, in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
