9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 811X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner of Income Tax (A) has erred in law and on facts in holding that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the IT. Act, 1961 are not applicable on payment of commission u/s 194H on the facts of the case. 3. That the appellant craves leave to modify any of the grounds of appeal given above and/or add any fresh ground as and when it is considered necessary to do so." 3. The Learned D.R. supported the assessment order. He also submitted that the written submissions filed by earlier D.R. Shri Praveen Kumar dated 20th July, 2011 should also be considered while deciding the present appeal, which is reproduced as under: "MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOURS 1. In para 4.4.1 and para 4.4.2 page 26 CIT(A) has mentioned as under:- 4.4.1 The appellant de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Securities " shall have the meaning assigned to it in clause (h) of section 2 of the securities contracts (Regulation) Act 1956 (42 of 1956). 6. Section 2 (h) of securities contract (Regulation) Act 1956 (42 of 1956) states as under:- (h) " securities" include- (i) Shares, scrips, stocks, bonds, debentures, debenture stock or other marketable securities of a like nature in or of any incorporated company or other body corporate; [(ia) derivative; (ib) units or any other instrument issued by any collective investment scheme to the investors in such schemes;] (ic) security receipt as defined in clause (zg) or section 2 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002;] (id) unit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... through the orders of the authorities below and the judgments cited by Learned A.R. for the assessee. As per the facts noted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order, it is seen that the assessee has received an amount of Rs.73,28,868/- being commission received from various mutual fund registrars on account of brokerage or commission for subscribing to various mutual funds by a number of investors. The Assessing Officer has also noted that the assessee has acted as a Mutual Fund Broker under Broker Code ARN-8814 for such investors and had earned commission to this extent. The Assessing Officer has also noted that the assessee had debited brokerage amount of Rs.51,27,815/- to one company namely M/s Tapasya Projects Ltd. Thereafter, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncies P. Ltd. (supra). As per the facts noted by the Tribunal, in that case also the dispute was similar. In that case also, the assessee was engaged as distributor of mutual fund units and he had appointed a sub agent for the same and commission was paid to the sub agent. Under these facts, it was held by the Tribunal that as per Explanation (i) to section 194H, no TDS was required to be deducted from such payment of commission because it is in relation to securities. In the present case also, the facts are similar and, therefore, this Tribunal's decision is squarely applicable in the facts of the present case. 5.2 In other two decisions also, under similar facts, similar issue was decided by the Tribunal in favour of the assessee. Learne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
