Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 749 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) - disallowance on the reason that the expenditure is covered u/s.28 and not covered under sections 30 to 38 - CIT(A) deleted the disallowance - Held that:- The provisions of sec.194C of the Act cannot come into play when the payments have been made to agents of a non-resident company and relied on the order of the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Taj Leather Works v. ACIT (2012 (7) TMI 300 - ITAT KOLKATA ). To uphold this argument also, there is no details of non-resident companies whether they have any PE business connection in India or not. Without bringing any material on record, the argument of the assessee’s counsel cannot be upheld. The Special Bench of the Tribunal, in the case of Merilyn Shipping and Transports v. ACIT (2012 (4) TMI 290 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM ), held that when the payments are not outstanding as payable at the end of the close of the year relevant to the assessment year, the provisions of sec.40(a)(ia) cannot be invoked. Considering the judgment of the Special Bench of the Tribunal, in the case of Merilyn Shipping and Transports v. ACIT (supra), we are inclined to remit the issue for fresh consideration. - Decided in favour of revenue for statistical purposes. Disallowance u/s 43B - addition made in respect of employees contribution to PF and ESI - whether the sum were remitted within the due date of filing the return of income? - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- Sums were not credited by the respective assessee to the employees’ accounts in the relevant fund or funds (in the present case Provident Fund and/or ESI Fund on or before the due date as per the explanation to section 36(1)(va) of the Act i.e. date by which the concerned assessee was required as an employer to credit employees’ contribution to the employees’ account in the Provident Fund under the Provident Fund Act and/or in the ESI Fund under the ESI Act. Consequently, all these appeals are allowed and the impugned judgement and orders passed by the CIT(A) in deleting the disallowances made by the AO are hereby quashed and set aside and the disallowances of the respective sums with respect to the Provident Fund / ESI Fund made by the AO is hereby restored. - Decided against assessee
|