TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 990X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in nature. The Ld. A.R. of the assessee has been fair enough to admit that even the Ld. CIT(A) has passed the impugned order without verification of the details submitted by the assessee. Even there is no finding that whether the liability was ascertained for which the provision was made and whether the identity of the prospective payees was established or not. The Ld. A.R. has fairly admitted that the entire issue requires re-examination at the end of the AO. We therefore set aside the impugned findings of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and restore the matter to the file of the AO for examination afresh and then to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after duly considering all the relevant contentions of the assessee on this issue. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ating the fact that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) are mandatory and reversals of the provisions made in subsequent year is immaterial for invoking provisions of Section 46(a)(ia) of the Act. 1(ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 4.12 crores on the ground that the amendment in section 40(a)(ia) brought w.e.f. 1.4.2010 is retrospective. 1(iii). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A)'s erred not appreciating that the TDS was deductible on account of Provisions for Expenses made by the assessee for the current year. 1(iv). On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT(A)'s erred holding th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ition made by the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) on account of disallowance of provision of expenses under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act for non deduction of TDS. The AO disallowed the provision made for various types of expenditure amounting to ₹ 24,42,25,551/- for non deduction of TDS. 4. In appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), it was submitted by the assessee that in case of some items of expenditure, the TDS provisions of section 40(a)(ia) were not attracted. In some cases, the TDS was deposited before the due date of filing of return and that rest of the amount had been reversed in the subsequent year and as such the TDS was not payable. The Ld. CIT(A), without verification of the claim of the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed the impugned order without verification of the details submitted by the assessee. Even there is no finding that whether the liability was ascertained for which the provision was made and whether the identity of the prospective payees was established or not. The Ld. A.R. has fairly admitted that the entire issue requires re-examination at the end of the AO. We therefore set aside the impugned findings of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and restore the matter to the file of the AO for examination afresh and then to pass a speaking order in accordance with law after duly considering all the relevant contentions of the assessee on this issue. Ground No.2 7. Ground Nos.2(i) to 2(iii) relate to the issue of disallowance on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e made solely on the basis of AIR information, especially, when the assessee denies any such receipt as the burden to prove such receipts is on the AO as the assessee cannot be asked to prove the negative. The relevant findings of the Tribunal for the sake of reference are reproduced as under: 6. We have considered the rival contentions of the ld. representatives of the parties. It is an undisputed fact on the file that the professional fees shown by the assessee in its P L account far exceeds than the amount shown in the AIR information. Even the assessee has reconciled the major portion of the receipts. It has not been denied by the Revenue Authorities that full and complete details of the parties are not mentioned in the AIR informa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
