Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

SURINDER KUMAR, PROP. MOSAIC HOUSE (INDIA) AND DILER STONE Versus ACIT, REWARI CIRCLE, REWARI

2015 (6) TMI 809 - ITAT DELHI

Unexplained cash payments reflected in cash book - Held that:- The balance sheet of M/s. Mosaic House furnished along with return of income shows the addition of ₹ 1,50,000/- against the property. Moreover it is not in dispute that assessee is an owner of the property although a personal property. It is also a matter of record that appellant has furnished affidavits of all the eight parties in support of the claim of advance against land. No doubt, appellant has failed to produce the parti .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tice that appellant has furnished revised cash book during the assessment proceedings explaining the discrepancy in the original cash book furnished during the assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer has discredited the said cash book without examining the same. We therefore, direct that while conducting fresh examination, the Assessing Officer would look into the explanation tendered and the revised cash book and not merely discredit the same. Accordingly, the issue of addition regarding .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s version. In the rejoinder to the remand report, the assessee contended that complete address, telephone/FAX No. and bank a/c no. was furnished to the AO during the remand proceedings but the AO has not taken any steps to enquire at his own level. We further find that Ld. CIT(A) has observed that it could be seen that the AO made addition in respect of the parties who have denied to have any outstanding amount with the appellant. It is not the case of not receiving any response from the credito .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ping companies - Held that:- since the payments have been made as reimbursement of expenses to the agents of the appellant, therefore, appellant was not obliged to deduct TDS under section 194C of the Act and as such, no disallowance is warranted u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Addition on difference in the account of Mls Venus Stone, Spain - Held that:- The sales in this case is ₹ 1.08 crores and the ledger account reflects ₹ 1.21 crores. At pag .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e 6DD. In our considered opinion, Ld. CIT(A) was right in observing that mere statement that the purchasers have no bank account a/c at that very place has no meaning without explaining the circumstances under which the assessee had to issue bearer cheques and as to how the transactions are covered under Rule 6DD. In view of above, Ld. CIT(A) has force in his finding in holding that in the absence of any evidence led by the assessee, the action of the AO in disallowing the amount u/s. 40A(3) was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iven by the AO that some of the expenses are unvouched or not properly vouched. The Assessee’s counsel has not contravened these observations of the AO. Therefore, in view of the above factual finding of the AO and Ld. CIT(A), Ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of 20% of the expenses, which does not need any interference on our part - Decided against assessee.

Addition under house hold expenses - Held that:- The house hold withdrawals of ₹ 1.00 lakh are quite low in response to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oes not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue - Decided against assessee. - I.T.A.No.467/DEL/2011,ITA No. 2222/DEL/2012 - Dated:- 16-6-2015 - Shri H.S. Sidhu and Shri J.S. Reddy, JJ. For the Petitioner: Sh. Gautam Jain, Adv. & Sh., P.K. Kamal, Adv. For the Respondent : S h. BRR Kumar, Sr. DR ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Assessee has filed these Appeals against the separate impugned Orders dated 19.11.2010 for AY 2007-08 and dated 28.3. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd other facts are on record. 2. That the learned CIT (Appeal) Rohtak has erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 386041/- by ignoring that the said amount was out of withdrawals entry of ₹ 4 Lacs from the books of M/s Mosaic House (India) Kund. 3. That the addition of ₹ 107939/- the alleged difference in sundry creditors accounts confirmed by the learned CIT(A) Rohtak is against the facts, written submissions and documents on record. 4. That the learned CIT (At Rohtak has grossl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd none of the same are of capital or personal in nature. 6. That the appellant craves the leave to add, modify, amend or delete any of the ground of appeal at the time of hearing. Further all the grounds of appeal as above are without prejudice to each other. 3. The grounds raised in ITA No. 2222/Del/2012 (A.Y. 2009-10) read as under:- 1. That the Learned CIT (A) Rohtak has erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 1321034/- alleged difference in the account of Mls Venus Stone, Spain. He has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o M/s Pooja Freight Forwarders, the intermediary agent on the behalf of appellant regarding in land haulage charges/Freight charges etc. to foreign agents and Govt. agencies where the provisions of Section 194C i.e. TDS not applicable. 4. That the Learned CIT (A) Rohtak has also grossly erred in enhancing the freight charges at ₹ 1803881/- which were paid for exporting the goods outside India to shipping agent exempted under the provisions of TDS. He has also ignored the facts and certific .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Commission 30000.00 7. Loading/Unloading Charges 10875.00 8. Certificate of Origin Charges 7200.00 9. Fumigation Charges 43500.00 10. Lasing Charges 5800.00 11. Miscellaneous 1900.00 12. Sea/ Air Freight Charges 569162.00 Total 3334986.00 He has further erred in applying the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) read with Section 194C on all the payments supported-with copies of bills and relevant documents on record. 6. That the confirming for additions of ₹ 24760/- the alleged calculations of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ces of expenses under various heads are quite arbitrary and without any findings. 9. That the confirming the addition of ₹ 20000/- under house hold expenses by the Learned CIT (A) Rohtak without any concrete findings and detection on record. 10. That the appellant craves the right to amend, delete or add any now grounds of appeal before and during hearing of appeal. ITA NO. 467/DEL/2011 (AY 2007-08) 4. The brief facts of the case are that the Return declaring total income of ₹ 7,37,0 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8. On 10.10.2008, none attended the proceedings. Again notice u/s. 142(1) was issued on 22.4.2009 for 1.4.2009 on 1.4.2009 also no body attended the assessment proceedings nor filed any application for seeking adjournment. Again notice u/s. 142(1) was issued on 1.9.2009 for 11.9.2009 and on that date assessee s counsel attended and sought adjournment for 22.10.2009. On 22.10.2009 assessee s counsel filed the details, but not produced books of accounts and case was adjourned for 29.10.2009 to pro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

T(A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. Ld. Counsel of the assessee in support of his contention has filed the Written Synopsis. For the sake of convenience, we are reproducing the same as under:- 1. FACTS-IN-BRIEF: 1.1 That appellant is proprietor of two concerns:- Sr. No. Name of the concern Nature of business i) Mls Mosaic House (India), Nandha More, Majra Kund, Rewari Domestic and foreign sale of stone tiles ii) M/s Diler Stone Nandha More, Majra Kund, Rewari -do- 1.2 Both propri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s of cash payments reflected in the cash books of M/s Mosaic House. 12,67,193 5 to 7 (2.3 to 2.5) 6-7 (6 to 6.1) 2. Addition made on account of alleged unexplained cash deposits in bank account of M/s Diler Stone 3,86,041/- 7 (2.6) 7 (707.1) 3. Additions on account of payment to sundry creditors outside books of account u/s 68 of the Act. 1,07,939 8(3) 7 (8 - 8.1) 4. Disallowance of expenditure incurred on export of goods through agents of freight shipping companies 18,72,599 9 (4.2) 8-9 (9-9.2) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f Addition: Relevant pages of the learned Assessing Officer: (pages 5 to 7 para 2.3 to 2.5) i) The explanation of the appellant that he had received advance of ₹ 11,50,000/- in March 2006 is an after thought ii) The affidavit furnished is on self-serving documents and, suffers from discrepancies (paras 2.3.1 to 2.3.9 of the order at pages 5 and 6 Relevant pages of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals): (pages 6-7 paras 6 to 6.1): iii) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

11.12.2009 (page' 34 of Paper Book) and 18.12.2009 (page 42 of Paper Book) d) Reply dated 15.12.2009 (page 38 of Paper Book) and 21.12.2009 (pages 43-44 of Paper Book) e) Evidence: i) Agreement to sell dated 26.3.2006 (pages 77-78 of Paper Book) ii) . Cash flow statement (page 76 of Paper Book) iii) Revenue cash book (pages 79-90 of Paper Book stated at pages 46 of Paper Book) iv) Affidavits of eight persons (page 58 of Paper Book) v) Statement of two persons (page 58 of Paper Book) vi) Titl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ated 20.10.2007 and, is duly audited, as would be evident from page 5 of Paper Book. ii) That books of accounts have been accepted and, not rejected u/s 145(3) of the Act iii) That cash-in-hand as on 31.3.2007 as per balance sheet is ₹ 45,228/- (page 5 of Paper Book), which is also the balance as per cash book (page 75 of Paper Book) iv) That even the original cash book, which has been made the basis of addition shows advance of ₹ 11,50,000/- (page 75 of Paper Book) and, transfer fro .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tement (page 76 of Paper Book) c) Revised cash book (pages 79-90 of Paper Book) vii) The learned Assessing Officer has admitted that even as per cash book the advance was received of ₹ 11,50,000/-. According to him however such advance was received on 31.3.2007 and, on 31.3.2006+ as is stated in cash book. The finding is contradictory. It is submitted that factum of receipt of advance cannot be deemed, as the same id duly reflected in financial statements/cash book. It is submitted that th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by affidavits of eight persons and statement of two persons recorded during assessment proceedings, which have been brushed aside by the learned Assessing Officer/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (see page 63 of Paper Book read with page 58 of Paper Book); It is submitted that are affidavits have been filed, mere non appearance in response to summons cannot be a ground to reject the claim of assessee. In view thereof, addition made may kindly be deleted. 3 Addition of ₹ 3,86,041/- 3.1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Stone as on 31.3.2007 (pages 17 of Paper Book) which shows cash in hand of ₹ 1,13,968/- b) Copy of original cash book furnished during assessment proceedings (pages 91 to 96 of Paper Book) which also shows clearly cash in hand of ₹ 1,13,966 (pages 96 of Paper Book) c) Show cause notice dated 11.12.2009 (pages 34-35 of Paper Book) d) Reply dated 15.12.2009 (page 38 of Paper Book) e) Copy of revised cash book (pages 97 to 103 of Paper Book) f) Submissions: i) Dated 15.3.2010 (page 47 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d Assessing Officer/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) cold not automatically discredit the same. In view thereof, addition made may kindly be deleted. 4 Ground No.3: Addition of ₹ 1,07,939/- The learned Assessing Officer has held at page 8 paras 3 to 3.2 have been paid in cash out of the books and, therefore such payments have been treated as income from undisclosed sources U/S 68 of the Act Sr. No. Name of creditors Amount (Rs.) Pages of Paper Book (showing Closing balance in balance s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

basis to discredit the audited books of appellant (pages 38-39 of Paper Book). He has held that the explanation is evasive and absurd, without appreciating that burden was on the basis to provide cross-examine of the said creditors. It is submitted that no opportunity was provided to the appellant to excess the parties (pages 47-48 of Paper Book). It is submitted that perusal of pages 205 to 208 of Paper Book would show that payment to all parties a subsequent year have been made by account pay .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t outward 5.1 The learned Assessing Officer has held that (page 9 para 4.2) no evidence was filed to prove that payment made to agents of shipping companies and, in absence thereof, appellant obliged to deduct TDS U/S 194C of the Act and, since no TDS has been deducted, sum was disallowed U/S 40(a)(ia) of the Act 5.2 The CIT(A) pages 8-9 paras 9 to 9.2) 5.2.1 The learned CIT(A) has also upheld the disallowance on the ground that Mls. Pooja Freight and Forwarders were not agents of non resident s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Aa dated 23.7.2010 wherein Shri Maman Singh had admitted that they were not agents of non resident shipping company. d) Note on expenses of M/s. Pooja Freight & Forwarders (pages 104 to 105 of Paper Book) e) Details of charges remittances by the appellant to Mls. Pooja Freight & Forwarders (pages 106-107 of Paper Book) f) Copy of ledger account of Mls. Pooja Freight & Forwarders (pages 212 to 217 of Paper Book) showing the closing balance of ₹ 1,18,758/- g) Copy of payments .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iler Stone ₹ 1,95,320/- The claim was supported by an agreement to sell dated 26.3.2006 (pages 77-78 of Paper Book) and raised cash book (pages 79 to 90 of Paper Book) The learned Assessing Officer (para 2.4 and 2.5) however held that explanation tendered is not acceptable on account of following reasons: i) Affidavit is a self serving document and suffers from many discrepancies: a) Overwriting of the date; b) Not entered in revenue records; c) Person mentioned are not from single family .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eafter Assessing Officer issued notice dated 18.12.2009 (page 42 of Paper Book) and, appellant filed reply dated 21.12.2009 (pages 43-44 of Paper Book) 5.6 The appellant seeks to place reliance on following judgments: i) 361 ITR 192 (Guj) CIT vs. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd. extracted (pages 261-262 of Paper Book) "It. is required to be noted that while confirming the order passed by the CIT(A) and deleting the disallowance, it has been specifically observed by the tribunal t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the agent, who had made payment on its behalf. On the aforesaid facts the learned tribunal also observed that the circular relied upon by the revenue that it is the liability of the assessee as principal agent to deduct the TDS will not be applicable and the said circular would be applicable for payment made to principal to principal. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, when the learned tribunal has confirmed the order passed by the CIT(A) quashing and setting aside .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(Ahd) dated 30.6.2011 ITO vs. Shri Saniani Vivek Gope (pages 304-323 of Paper Book) vi) ITA No. 1948/Ahd/2009 (Ah) DCIT vs. Harsh Geochem Ltd. (pages 324-347 of Paper Book) 5.7 Apart from the above, it is well settled law that provision of section 194C of the Act are not attracted on payments made to agents of non resident shipping companies as has been held in following judgments: i) 163 Taxman 479 (Del) CIT vs. Continental Carriers (P) Ltd. (pages 292-293 of Paper Book) ii) 103 TTJ 103 (Del) I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the following judgments: i) ITA No. 359 and 511/2012 (Del) dated 25.8.2014 CIT vs. Opera Global (P) Ltd. (pages 353-356 of Paper Book) ii) 146 ITD 745 (Mum) ITO (TDS) vs. Vishinda Diamonds (pages 281- 286 of Paper Book) iii) 64 SOT 15 (Bang) DCIT vs. Dhaanya Seeds (P) Ltd. Section 194C, read with section 40(a)(ia), of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deduction of tax at source - Contractors/sub-contractors, payments to [Reimbursement of expenses] - Assessment year 2005-06 - Whether where expenses we .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1961 - Deduction of tax at source - Contractors/subcontractors, payments to [Reimbursement of expenses] - Assessment year 2002-03 - Assessee entered into an agreement with 'NLP' to work as an agent for assessee - Assessing Officer having information that assessee had not deducted tax at source on' certain payment to 'NLP' disallowed said amount - Whether payment made to NLP as an agent in pursuance of agreement for supply of trucks were merely reimbursement, and assessee had .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssee] iv) ITA No.32911Ahd72008 dated 11.11.2009 ITO vs. Mls Yash Enterprise Section 194J i) 95 TTJ 53 (Del) ITO vs. Dr. Willmar Schwabe India (p.) Ltd. ii) 51 taxmann.com 128 (Mum) ASK Wealth Advisors (p.) Ltd. vs. Asst. CIT iii) 146 ITD 745 (Mum) ITO vs. Vishinda Diamonds iv) 134 ITD 486 (Ahd) Karnavati Co-op. Bank Ltd. vs. DCIT v) 209 Taxman 18 (Del) CIT vs. Expeditors International (India).(P.) Ltd. 5.10 Apart from the above it is submitted that since sum stood declared as income by the payee .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

146 TTJ 1 (SB) (Vishakapatnam) (SB) Merilyn Shipping and Transports vs. Addl. CIT iii) ITA No. 249 of 2013 (AP) CIT vs. New Bombay Goods Transport iv) 123 TTJ 888 (Jaipur) Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. DCIT v) ITA No. 228/2014 (O&M) (P&H) dated 20.11.2014 CIT vs. Mls Rajinder Parshad Jain (pages 348-352 of Paper Book) vi) ITA No. 52/2014 (Hyd) CIT vs. Janapriya Engineers Syndicate (pages 366-368 of Paper Book) 5.11 It is also submitted that once assessee had bonafide reason to beli .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

provision in Finance Bill 2012 5.13 It is submitted that the aforesaid amendment is retrospective as the same is clarificatory: i) 224 ITR 677 (SC) Allied Motors (P) Ltd. vs. CIT ii) ITA No. 10791Hyd/2013 dated 123.2014 A.Y. 2007-08. Astt. CIT vs. Mls PLR Projects (P) Ltd. iv) ITA No. 590/2013 dated 15.7.2014 (Kar) Santosh Kumar Shetty v) ITA No. 412/2013 (Guj) Om Prakash R. Chaudhary vi) ITA No. 1056IMum/2011 A.Y. 2006-07 dated 26.11.2014 Dr. Adi R. Nazir vs. ACIT vi) ITA No. 18521Pune/2012 dat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and Stationery 24,250 Total 3,09,330/- 6.2 In this view, the internal vouchers do not have narration and, signed by one man is same style. As such, he held genuineness and, reasonableness of explanation is not ascertainable. 6.3 The appellant filed following submission in respect of above claims: i) Submission dated 15.12.2010 (page 49 of Paper Book) 6.4 It is well settled position of law that adhoc disallowances are not tenable in law, as has been held by the following judicial pronouncements: .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

J 485 (Cal) Trimurti Salt Compnay v ITO 6.5 It is further submitted that, in absence of any basis given by the learned Assessing Officer, the disallowance is not tenable. Reliance is placed on the judgment of State of Orissa v. Maharaja Shri B.P.Singh Deo (1970) reported in 76 ITR 690 (SC) 6.6 Moreover it is not a case where books of accounts have been produced alongwith vouchers. It is submitted that vouchers are always self ·generated and suspicion howsoever strong cannot be basis to di .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y kindly be deleted. 8. On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the Ld. First Appellate Authority and stated that the Appeal filed by the Assessee may be dismissed, because assessee has not produced any evidence to support its claim before the Revenue Authority. 9. We have heard both the counsel and perused the relevant records available with us, especially the orders passed by the revenue authorities alongwith the Written Synopsis filed by the assessee as well as the case laws c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e and M/s Diler Stone, proprietorship concerns of the appellant. From the perusal of the cash book of M/s. Mosaic House, the Assessing Officer noted that there is no opening cash in hand and payments in cash upto 30.3.2007 were of ₹ 17,97,141/-; whereas the cash receipts amounted to only ₹ 5,29,948/- and as such, there was a difference of ₹ 12,67,193/- which was added as income. Further, the cash book of M/s Diler Stone for the period l.4.2006 to 3l.3.2007 revealed that assesse .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

evised cash book. In a reply dated 15.12.2009 furnished by the appellant, in response to letter dated 11.12.2009 of the Assessing Officer, it was stated as under: "1 That as regards to your query regarding difference in inflow of cash of ₹ 12,67,193/- in Mosaic House (India), it is submitted that while considering the inflow you have not considered the amount of ₹ 11,50,000/- received as advance against land property and further a sum of ₹ 1,95,320/- was also transferred f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ice, it is submitted that there was opening balance of ₹ 75,959/- and thereafter a sum of ₹ 4,00,000/- was transferred from the cash book of Mosaic House (India) and out of these amounts a sum of ₹ 4,50,000/- was deposited in the bank. Both the accounts were maintained in same computer. But due to virus problem unfortunately these entry was disturbed and due to over sight of these entries both the cash book were printed without noticing these entries. " 10.1 The learned As .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed the Assessing Officer to furnish a remand report whereby the Assessing Officer admitted that appellant furnished affidavits of all the persons who had advanced the sums to the appellant. He also admitted that one of the persons Shri Santosh Kumar attended and admitted to have advanced ₹ 1,15,000/- though not as an advance against the property. As regards Shri Rajesh Kumar, another person produced before the Assessing Officer, the Assessing Officer did not record any statement as name of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 1,50,000/- against the property. Moreover it is not in dispute that assessee is an owner of the property although a personal property. It is also a matter of record that appellant has furnished affidavits of all the eight parties in support of the claim of advance against land. No doubt, appellant has failed to produce the parties before the Assessing Officer during the remand proceedings yet it is a matter of record that one of the persons who was produced admitted to have advanced ₹ 1, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt proceedings. The Assessing Officer has discredited the said cash book without examining the same. We therefore, direct that while conducting fresh examination, the Assessing Officer would look into the explanation tendered and the revised cash book and not merely discredit the same. Accordingly, the issue of addition regarding unexplained deposit in the cash book of the appellant is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for denova examination and adjudication after granting necessary .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

report, the assessee contended that complete address, telephone/FAX No. and bank a/c no. was furnished to the AO during the remand proceedings but the AO has not taken any steps to enquire at his own level. We further find that Ld. CIT(A) has observed that it could be seen that the AO made addition in respect of the parties who have denied to have any outstanding amount with the appellant. It is not the case of not receiving any response from the creditors or return of the letters as comeback un .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

this issue and dismiss the ground no. 3 raised by the assessee. 12. Ground 4 of the Grounds of Appeal relates to disallowance of ₹ 18,72,599/- representing expenditure incurred on export of goods through agents of freight shipping companies. The Assessing Officer has held that no evidence was filed to prove that payments were made to agents of shipping companies and therefore, since appellant did not deduct TDS under section 194C of the Act, the same is not allowable under section 40(a)(ia .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rwarders has paid freight to the shipping line on behalf of the appellant. It has been clarified that Mediterranean Shipping Company is a Geneva, Italy based shipping line and they have a tax exemption certificate from the Income Tax Department. The CIT(A) however held that since M/s. Pooja Freight Forwarders is not a agent of any foreign shipping companies and therefore, the payments made by the appellant to M/s. Pooja Freight Forwarders was liable for TDS. We find that the issue involved in th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed by the agents on behalf of the assessee for transportation as no other parties which has been felt out in the bills including commission to the agent. It was therefore, held as under: The learned tribunal also observed that the relation between the assessee and the agent is principal and an agent. The learned tribunal also observed that so far as the obligation to deduct tax at source from the payment of transport charges and other charges is concerned, the same was complied with by the agent .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

der passed by the Assessing Officer in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 6,93,372/-and ₹ 76,00,509/- claimed by the assessee under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, we see no reason to interfere with the same. No error has been committed by the learned tribunal in confirming the order passed by the CIT(A). No question of law, much less substantial question of law, arises in the present appeal. Hence, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. 12.1. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

deration this circular and found that certain payments made by the assessee to the C and F agents who have already made the payment on behalf of the assessee were not covered either under s. 194C or under s. 195, as they are covered under the provisions of s. 172. Therefore, we hold that learned CIT(A) was justified in holding that on certain payments the provisions of ss. 194C and 195 were not applicable and, therefore, assessee was not liable to deduct TDS. Such payments have been discussed by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

TDS has been deducted by assessee. There were other small payments of ₹ 9,816 on account of other expenses on which TDS was not applicable. In this way, the entire addition of ₹ 1,60,41,692 was deleted by learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) has discussed each item in detail and then only it has been held that assessee was not liable to make deduction of TDS on reimbursement of expenses. Various Benches of the Tribunal are taking a consistent view that if the payments are made on accou .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

deducted TDS on account of non-resident company by observing that the amount spent towards accommodation and conveyance of the officer/employee of the non-resident company was not required to be treated as a part of their income, whereas it was a part of their income. Therefore, Hon'ble Karnataka High Court held that on this amount TDS was deductible. However, in the present case the facts are entirely distinguishable. There is no component of income on the amount paid by assessee on account .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e assessee and learned CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance. One more decision has been relied on by the learned Departmental Representative in case of Associated Cement Co. Ltd. (supra) and we find that facts in this case are also distinguishable. In this case also we find that facts are totally different from the facts involved in the case in hand. Moreover, the payments made by assessee are covered by s. 172 where provisions of ss. 194C and 195 are not applicable as clarified by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

payments are covered by Circular No. 723, dt. 19th Sept., 1995 and on remaining payment, the agent has deducted TDS or the assessee has deducted the TDS. Therefore, in view of these facts and circumstances and in view of detailed reasoning given by learned CIT(A) which has been reproduced in this order, we hold that learned CIT(A) was justified in holding that assessee was not liable to deduct TDS on the amount reimbursed by the assessee. Accordingly, we confirm the order of learned CIT(A). &qu .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on at sources and other shipping coy. Certificates furnished. Rs.61,224 Shipping bill for material charges charged by govt. Rs.19,495 Certificate charges by govt. On documents furnished for export Rs.13,500 Loading and unloading charges, petty in nature Rs.75,000 Certificate fee charges by govt. Rs.11,000 Fumigation charges on storage to prevent the goods for damages Rs.6,100 License fee charges bill wise Rs.2,42,608.50 Misc. And Petty charges Sea/Air freight not subject to TDS Total : ₹ 1 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

lowance is warranted u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Having regard to the above, we delete the addition and allow the ground raised by the appellant. 13. With regard to ground no. 5 relating to confirmation of addition of ₹ 1,54,665/- is concerned, we find that the AR of the counsel has submitted that all the expenses claimed are supported with vouchers. The action of the AO in disallowing 50% of the expenditure without pointing out any defect is arbitrary and unjustified. Ld. CIT(A) has conside .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

as sustained by the Ld. CIT(A), which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and dismiss the ground no. 5 raised by the assesee in its appeal. In the result, the Assessee s being ITA No. 467/Del/2011 (A.Y. 2007-08) stands party allowed for statistical purposes. ITA No. 2222/Del/2012 (A.Y. 2009-10) 14. With regard to ground nos. 3, 4 and 5 in the assessee s own case the issue is the same as dealt with by us in the order for the AY 20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ledger of M/s Venus Stores, Spain demonstrates that the figures have been reconciles, the discrepancy explained. In the result ground no.1 is allowed. 16. With regard to ground no. 2 relating to confirmation of addition of ₹ 6 lacs u/s. 40A(3) is concerned, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has observed that it has not been disputed by the assessee that the cheques are not bearer cheques. The assessee s counsel failed to lead only evidence and submissions as to how the particular transactions are co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

u/s. 40A(3) was upheld, which does not need any interference on our part, hence, we uphold the same and dismiss the ground no. 2 raised by the assessee. 17. Ground no.6 is addition on account of notional interest. It is well settled law that the Hon ble Gauhati High Court in the case of Highways Constructions Co. Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax 199 ITR 702 held that notional interest cannot be charged. This ground is allowed. 18. The ground no. 7 relating to confirmation of addition of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version