TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 771X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such understanding was accepted by the Revenue. It may be pointed out that in the subsequent years the Assessing Officer admitted that provisions of section 194J of the Act are not applicable in respect of payments, made by member industrial undertakings to VWEMCL, in the form of affluent treatment charges. On a conscpectus of the matter, impugned payments are not hit by the provisions of section 194J of the Act and consequently disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 40(a)(i) of the Act is not in accordance with law – Decided in favor of Assessee. - I.T.A. No.2605 /Mum/2012 - - - Dated:- 9-10-2013 - Shri P. M. Jagtap, AM And Shri Vivek Varma, JM,JJ. For the Petitioner : Shri K. Gopal For the Respondent : S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allowance following his order rendered in assessee's own case in the earlier years on the similar issue. 3. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. It is observed that a similar issue involved in assessee's own case for the earlier years i.e. assessment years 2004-05 to 2008-09 has been decided by the Tribunal vide its common order dated 9-04-2013 passed in ITA No. 3233/Mum/10 and others for the following reasons given in para No. 5:- "5. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record, we find that this issue is no more res integra in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Smifs Securities Ltd. [(2012) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .O. u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 6. During the year under consideration, payment of Rs. 2,04,056/- was made by the assessee to M/s Vapi Waste and Effluent Management Co. Ltd. (VWEMCL). According to the A.O., the assessee was required to deduct tax at source from the said payment made on account of fee for technical services and since no such tax was deducted by the assessee, he disallowed the amount of Rs. 2,04,056/- paid by the assessee to M/s VWEMCL by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance made by the A.O. on this issue for the following reasons given in para 3.3 of his impugned order:- "3.3. 1 have gone through the assessment order, p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee has submitted that a similar issue involved in the case of M/s Ruby Macons Ltd. vs. DCIT for assessment year 2005-06 has been decided by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee vide its order dated 11th June, 2010 passed in ITA No. 4056/Mum/2008. He has also placed on record a copy of the said order and a perusal of the same shows that a similar disallowance made by the A.O. u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) on account of payment made to M/s VWEMCL was deleted by the Tribunal for the following reasons given in para 14 15 of its order:- "14. We may turn to the facts of the case on hand so as to appreciate as to whether the services rendered by VWEMCL involves human interface or was it merely a standard facilit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocality and such understanding was accepted by the Revenue. It may be pointed out that in the subsequent years the Assessing Officer admitted that provisions of section 194J of the Act are not applicable in respect of payments, made by member industrial undertakings to VWEMCL, in the form of affluent treatment charges. On a conscpectus of the matter, we are of the view that the impugned payments are not hit by the provisions of section 194J of the Act and consequently disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 40(a)(i) of the Act is not in accordance with law". 8. As the issue involved in the year under consideration as well as all the material facts relevant thereto are similar to that of A.Y. 2005-06, we respectfully follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irected the A.O. to dispose of the said application after verifying the claim of the assessee. As submitted by the ld. counsel for the assessee, the A.O., however, has not disposed of the application filed by the assessee u/s 154 of the Act inspite of the direction given by the ld. CIT(A). We, therefore, direct the A.O. to dispose of the Misc. Application filed by the assessee claiming the credit for advance tax of Rs. 10 lacs expeditiously after necessary verification. Ground No. 6 of the assessee's appeal is accordingly treated as allowed. 11. Ground No. 7 raised by the assessee claiming relief by way of increasing the value of opening stock of the year under consideration as a result of the addition made to the value of closing stock i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
