Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 1419 - AT - Income TaxTDS u/s 194H - TDS on sales commission payments - HELD THAT:- No illegality or any irregularity in both the learned lower authorities’ action that assessee was required to deduct TDS on sales commission payments u/s 194H - assessee’s reliance on various clarifications also are devoid of merit since these nowhere deal with TDS on commission payment required under Chapter XVII of the Act.- lower authorities have rightly invoked the impugned disallowance in principle so far as assessee’s commission payments made to 31 salesmen are concerned. We make it clear that TDS deduction is a statutory duty for the payer under the provisions of the Act. We thus uphold both the learned lower authorities’ action in issue invoking the impugned disallowance. Quantification of the impugned disallowance - The legislature has itself amended section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act 2014 w.e.f. 01.04.2015 restricting the impugned disallowance from 100% of the corresponding expenses to 30% only. The Revenue’s case is that the same applies from 01.04.2015 only not having any retrospective effect in the impugned assessment year 2011-12 - No substance in Revenue’s instant argument. This tribunal’s coordinate bench’s decision in Dipak Parui [2018 (7) TMI 2066 - ITAT KOLKATA] holds the above amendment as a curative one having a retrospective effect. We therefore direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the impugned disallowance to 30% only of the assessee’s expenditure claim. Necessary computation to follow as per law. This former substantive ground is partly accepted in above terms. Addition u/s 68 unexplained cash credits - assessee has failed to prove the impugned sum as genuine right from scrutiny to remand proceedings as well as the CIT(A)’s order - HELD THAT:- We find no reason to sustain the impugned disallowance. Page 59 in paper book suggests that the opening balance sum of ₹ 9,22,767/- involving four entries of ₹ 3,70,446/-, 98,668/-, 3,72,438/- and 81,215/- stood paid between 01.04.2011 to 23.04.2011 as per the corresponding ledger entries. Coupled with this, the concerned party(ies) have also filed necessary confirmation before the Assessing Officer at the first instance - more particularly the assessee’s repayment through banking channel, to hold that both the lower authorities have erred in treating the impugned sum as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 - Decided in favour of assessee.
|