9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1305X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t thereby overriding Board's Circular No. 1/2011 [F.No. 142/1/2011-SO(TPL)], dated 6-4-2011, wherein it is clearly stated that the said amendment to section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act would be applicable to assessment year 10-11 and subsequent years." 3. Brief facts as can be seen from the orders of the Revenue authorities are that the assessee has filed its return of income on 31.10.2005 declaring total income at Rs. 1,38,360/-. This return was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice under section 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that assessee has debited a sum of Rs. 75,49,425/- to the P&L account as carting expenses. On further verification of the record, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rameschandra Bhrambhatt which was followed by the ld.CIT(A). A copy of the order of the ITAT in the case of Rameschandra Bhrabhatt (supra) is placed on record. 6. We have considered submissions of the parties and also material available on record. We do not find any illegality in the order of the ld.CIT(A), inasmuch as the ld.CIT(A) while passing the impugned order has taken into consideration order of the ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Rameschandra Brahmbhatt (supra), wherein in an identical situation, the Tribunal allowed similar claim of the assessee towards carting expenses. The relevant part of the Tribunal reads as under: "4. Now the appellant is before us. The ld. Counsel for the appellant contended that the assessee had pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue, ld. Sr. D.R. relied upon the orders of the authorities below and requested to confirm the addition. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and considering the case laws cited by the appellant. Both the parties are agreed that the facts are identical with the case laws cited by the appellant and squarely applicable in case of appellant. TDS had been deducted by the appellant which was paid on 13.05.2005 which is before the due date of filing the return for A.Y. 05-06. Accordingly, the assessee's appeal is allowed." In the light of the above, provision of Section 40(a)(ia) does not attract in the case of the assessee. The ld.CIT(A) has rightly deleted the impugned disallowance. His order is accordingly upheld, and the appeal of the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
