TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 1059X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer for verification afresh whether the expenses of ₹ 2,98,958 has been incurred for free service payment or not. If these expenses are incurred for free services, needless to say that no disallowance can be made - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes . Disallowance on godown rent paid - Held that:- The rent paid to above four parties is not exceeding ₹ 1,20,000 in each case and this fact has not been verified by either the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). In such circumstances, learned counsel for the assessee fairly stated that this issue can be remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes . Disallowance of advertisement and publicity expenses - Held that:- e amount of advertisement and publicity expenses paid to Shresti Lifestyle Entertainment Ltd. is below ₹ 50,000 in whole of the year and once this is the position no disallowance can be made as the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS. - Decided in favour of assessee. Belated payments of employees' contribution to provident fund - Held that:- Once the issue i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... visions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) also confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, now the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. We find that the assessee has paid rent to the extent of ₹ 1,20,000 at ₹ 10,000 per month. The assessee has not deducted TDS from the same. Learned counsel for the assessee before us stated that he has filed copy of the ledger account which was available before the lower authorities and in view of this, the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS under section 194-I of the Act as the payment is to the extent of ₹ 1,20,000 only. We have seen factually that the rent is to the extent of ₹ 1,20,000 and it does not exceed the limit as prescribed under section 194-I of the Act. Once this is the position, the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS and once the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS no disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act can be made. 5. The next disallowance is electricity charges which is ₹ 4,364. As the assessee is not liable to deduct TDS on this electricity charges, no disallowance by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the expenses of ₹ 2,98,958 has been incurred for free service payment or not. If these expenses are incurred for free services, needless to say that no disallowance can be made. This ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 9. Now, we are coming to I. T. A. No. 698/K/2012. The first issue in this appeal of the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeals) confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on godown rent paid to following four parties : (Rs.) (i) L. N. Konar 1,11,703.50 (ii) S. K. Daga 32,400.00 (iii) Jagadish Prasad 20,572.00 (iv) Kalyani Konar 20,030.00 1,84,705.00 10. At the outset, it is seen that the rent paid to above four parties is not exceeding ₹ 1,20,000 in each case and this fact has not been verified by either the Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2. That like-wise Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-DGP has further erred in confirming the addition ₹ 6,570 and ₹ 3,345 (Total ₹ 9,915) of delayed payment of provident fund and employees' State insurance contribution of employer though paid within the time of filing of return. 14. Briefly stated facts are that according to the Assessing Officer, the amounts deposited representing employees' contribution to provident fund and employees' State insurance beyond the statutory due dates. The said sum was deducted from the salaries/wages of the employees but were not credited to the respective funds within the statutory due date and accordingly includible to the assessee's income in terms of section 2(24)(x) read with section 36(1)((va) of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved, the assessee is now in appeal before us. 15. We have heard both sides and gone through facts and circumstances of the case. We find that the amounts of employees' contribution to provident fund and employees' State insura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
