9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 173X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e nature of capital expenditure are not allowed under the provision of section 37(1). (b) The aim of the expenditure incurred by the assessee is clearly in the nature of acquisition of an advantage of lasting nature and to bring an enduring benefit to the business." 3. We have heard both the sides and perused the material placed before us. We find this issue to be covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of ITAT in assessee's own case for AY 2007-08 vide ITA No.1330/Del/2012 and AY 2008-09 vide ITA No.4743/Del/2012. That Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has upheld the order of the ITAT for AY 2007-08 vide judgment dated 10th December,2013 in ITA No.313/2013. Respectfully following the same, we uphold the order of learned CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Revenue's appeal. 7. Ground No.3 of the Revenue's appeal reads as under:- "Whether the ld.CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,92,61,418/- made on account of disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) ignoring the fact that - (a) The AO to give necessary relief in the subsequent year, if the TDS has been paid and deducted in the subsequent Finance Year. (b) The legal position that disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) is mandatory in the year when TDS was deductible but has not been deducted. There is no question of making allowance for the reason that the expenditure has been reversed in later year." 8. At the time of hearing before us, it is stated by the learned DR that learned CIT(A) has allowed the relief following his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue in paragraph 10 of his order and the heading of paragraph 10 itself is "Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) for failure to deduct tax at source". In paragraph 10a, the Assessing Officer held as under:- "During the course of assessment proceedings, it was seen that TDS was not deducted on the entire payment of cost of content. Accordingly, a query in this regard was raised vide order sheet noting dt. 21.10.2011, in response to which, it was replied by the assessee company vide letter dt. 21.11.2011 that there is a net provision for cost of content as on 31.03.2009 is Rs. 6,91,84,299/-, out of this provision for commission of Rs. 99,22,881/- on which no TDS is deductible since the commission is payable outside India. Thus, net amount of provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition of Rs. 71,37,136/- made on account of commission paid to foreign parties ignoring the facts that the provisions of section 9 of the I.T. Act the payments made to non-residents is an income deemed to accrue or arise in India and the assessee company is liable to deduct tax on the same." 13. The Assessing Officer has disallowed the same on the ground that the assessee failed to deduct the tax at source on the commission paid to non-residents. The learned CIT(A) decided these issues following the decision of ITAT in the case of DCIT Vs. Angelique International Ltd. At the time of hearing before us, it was pointed out by the learned counsel that the above decision of ITAT has been upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
