Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (6) TMI 350 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194C - non deduction of TDS on payments made against printing and processing work - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- The assessee has filed copies of bills pertaining to M/s Print-O-Pack Ltd. The same were on account of purchases of magazines and promotional forms. The CIT(A) has recorded that these bills show that the assessee has purchased magazines and promotional forms and the cost of magazine etc. includes cost of paper, printing and binding. He has further recorded that the assessee has also filed confirmation from M/s Print-O-Pack Ltd. vide letter dated 28th November, 2011 wherein it is mentioned that the bills were raised for magazines and brochures which include the cost of paper, printing and binding. The CIT(A) has given a finding that the confirmation from M/s Print-O-Pack Ltd. proves that the payments were made not for the job work or printing charges and in the case of the assessee, it was purchase of magazines and promotional forms and therefore, there was no question of deducting TDS - Decided in favour of assesse. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - non deduction of TDS on payments made against packing and forwarding charges - CIT(A) deleted the addition while accepting additional evidences - Held that:- The assessee has filed copies of bills and confirmations of parties before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) has given a finding that on going through these bills, it was seen that the assessee has purchased poly shrink and polythene bags from M/s Allied Plast, board from Chandra Shekhar (Puraney Dabbey Waley) and Bale Hessien Cloth from Ghanshyam Jute Trading Co. He has recorded a finding that these items are purchases of packing and forwarding material and not the payment for packing and forwarding as observed by the Assessing Officer and therefore, are not covered under the provisions of Section 194C of the Act. In these facts of the case, we are of the view that since the payments were made for purchase of packing and forwarding material, the provision of Section 194C was inapplicable and therefore, no disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act could be made - Decided in favour of assesse. Disallowance of unverified bad debts - Held that:- A perusal of the details written off as filed in the compilation before us shows that it consists of various debtor parties whose amount due was ranging from ₹ 513/- to ₹ 5,80,601/-. Allowing the small amounts due from various parties and written off by the assessee, the balance amounts exceeding ₹ 20,000/- are addable due to no evidence whatsoever produced by the assessee to show that these were genuine items of bad debts written off by the assesse. Accordingly, the amount of ₹ 9,36,598/- is disallowed on account of failure of the assessee to provide any copy of correspondence with these parties and also failure to communicate the address of these debtor parties and addition is sustained to that extent and the balance addition is deleted - Decided partly in favour of revenue. Addition u/s 2(22)(e) on account of deemed dividend - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- provision of Section 2(22)(e) was not applicable in the case of the assessee as it is well settled that deemed dividend can be assessed only in the hands of a person who is a shareholder of the lender company and not in the hands of a person other than a shareholder. The issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Bhaumik Colors Pvt.Ltd. - [2008 (11) TMI 273 - ITAT BOMBAY-E ]. - Decided in favour of assesse
|