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 →

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 4 (3) , Versus M/s Mehta Vakil and Co., Pvt. Ltd.,

2015 (10) TMI 757 - ITAT MUMBAI

Computation of MAT tax liability - Whether the tax liability arising under normal provisions of the Act and u/s 115JB should be compared before allowing Rebate u/s 88E of the Act or after allowing the rebate? - Held that:- CIT(A) has followed the decision rendered by the Bangalore bench of Tribunal in the case of M/s Horizon Capital Ltd (2010 (7) TMI 991 - ITAT BANGALORE) and also the decision rendered by the Delhi bench of Tribunal in the case of M/s MBL & Co. Ltd (2011 (4) TMI 1312 - ITAT DELH .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ataka (2011 (10) TMI 489 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ), wherein it was held that the assessee is entitled to deduct the rebate u/s 88E of the Act from the tax liability arising u/s 115JB of the Act. Thus the tax liability arising under normal provisions of the Act and u/s 115JB of the Act should be compared before allowing rebate u/s 88E of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Transaction charges paid to BSE/NSE - disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - non-deduction of tax at source - CIT(A) de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to the assessee. The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee has started deducting tax at source from the transaction charges subsequent to the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court. Hence, for the foregoing reasons, we uphold the decision of Ld CIT(A) on this issue.- Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No.8741/Mum/2011 - Dated:- 13-3-2015 - B.R.BASKARAN (AM) and SANJAY GARG (JM) Appellant by Shri Asghar Zain-VP Respondent by Shri Satish Chandak ORDER Per B.R.BASKARAN, Accountant Member: The ap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source. 2. We have heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee company is engaged in the business of Share broking, trading and investment in shares. We shall first take up the issue relating to the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessee had paid transaction charges of ₹ 98,85,800/- and VSAT charges/lease line charges of ₹ 4,35,363/- to BSE/NSE without deducting tax at source under any of the provisions of the .....

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 (ITA No.1825/Mum/2009) (b) Kotak Securities Ltd (2009)(318 ITR (AT) 268) (c) Shri Vinod K Nevatia (ITA No.6556/Mum/2009) (d) M/s Angel Broking Ltd (2010)(35 SOT 457)(Mum). The revenue is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in respect of transaction charges. 3. We notice that the Hon ble jurisdictional Bombay High Court has held in the case of CIT Vs. Kotak Securities Ltd (2012)(340 ITR 333) that the transaction charges paid by the assessee to the stock exchanges constitute fee for technical .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cts, held as under:- However, since both the revenue and assessee were under the bona fide belief for nearly a decade that tax was not deductible at source on payment of transaction charges, no fault can be found with the assessee in not deducting the tax at source in the assessment year in question consequently disallowance made by the assessing officer under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act in respect of the transaction charges cannot be sustained. We made it clear that we have arrived at the abov .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

was rendered on 21- 10-2011 and the present assessment year is AY 2008-09. We have already noticed that, prior to the decision of Honble Bombay High Court, the various benches of the Tribunal have been holding that the tax was not deductible at source from the transaction charges paid to the Stock exchanges. Hence, it can be seen that the assessee before us also, was under bona fide belief in this regard and hence, we are of the view that the benefit of doubt given to the assessee by the Hon ble .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ate bench has taken identical view. Hence, for the foregoing reasons, we uphold the decision of Ld CIT(A) on this issue. 5. The next issue relate to the computation of MAT tax liability vis-à-vis the rebate u/s 88E of the Act. The AO took the view that the MAT tax liability should be compared with the tax payable under normal provisions of the tax after deducting the rebate allowable u/s 88E of the Act. However, the assessee contended that the tax liability under both the provisions shoul .....

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