9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 780X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 143(3) of Income Tax Act 1961. The impugned notice is dated 30th March 2012. It was therefore issued more than four years after the end of the Assessment Year in question. The reasons for reopening were furnished under cover of a letter dated 19th October 2012. 4. The reasons are in two parts. The first part alleges that the assessee had not deducted tax on the payments mentioned therein. The second alleges that the Petitioner wrongly claimed deduction in respect of the security transaction tax. As far as first part of the notice is concerned, it is alleged that the Petitioner had not deducted tax on the following payments : "i) Transaction Charges Rs.73.71 lacs ii) Repairs and Maintenance Rs.45.76 lacs iii) Arbitrage Rs.64.13 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case, on this ground itself, the Petitioner ought to succeed as the reassessment proceedings are started beyond the period of four years from the end of the Assessment Year in question. Mr Mody, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner, however, established that in any event, the Assessing Officer had raised queries in respect of each of the items, the Petitioner had responded to each of them in writing and the Assessment Order was passed under section 143(3) only after consideration of the same. 7.(A) Re : Item No.2 of the querysheet reads as follows: "02. Whether TDS has been deducted on the Transaction charges of Rs.1,07,10,760/- paid to NSE and if not why the expenses should not be disallowed?" (B) The Petitioner, b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt material. Indeed, such a contention could not have been raised as the Petitioner had clearly disclosed the entire record in this regard. The reopening on this ground therefore is not maintainable. 8. (A)Re: Item No.4 of the querysheet reads as under : "4. It is seen that repairs and maintenance of Rs.45,76,256 has been paid towards hardware, network and software. You are requested to give the nature of payments made in connection with the above repairs and maintenance charges and state whether the TDS has been deducted and why the payment should not be treated as capital in nature and disallowed." (B) The Petitioner by its letter dated 19th November 2007 furnished monthwise and partywise details of repairs and maintenance, Equipment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uerysheet issued on 26th December 2007 reads as under : "08. Please submit whether TDS has been deducted on Demat charges of Rs.61,08,581/. In case, TDS is not deducted please explain why the same should not be disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia)." (B) By the letter dated 28th December 2007, the Petitioner stated that it had deducted tax on Demat charges and enclosed a statement in respect thereto. Even in this regard it is not contended by the Respondents that any material had been withheld or that the tax not being deducted in respect of any payment other than the mentioned in the statement. The proposed reopening in this regard is therefore not sustainable. 11. (A) Re: Item No.7 of the querysheet which reads as under : "07. It is observed that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
