9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 30,27,85,170/- made on account of loss claimed due to cancellation of forward contract?" 4. Proposed question [B] relates to deletion of disallowance of Rs. 2,69,00,000/- made on account of unexplained capital introduced by the partners. The Tribunal, in the impugned order, has noted that the assessee had filed tax details of all the partners and that the Assessing Officer had not disputed that the credits in the accounts of the partners were not deposits from the partners. According to the Tribunal, the addition could not be made in the hands of the firm and if anything remained unexplained, the addition could only be made in the hands of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asoning adopted by the Tribunal. 6. Proposed question [D] relates to deletion of disallowance of Rs. 2,51,91,060/- made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In this regard, the Commissioner (Appeals) noted that the assessee had deducted tax at source of Rs. 5,19,047/- on a total amount of Rs. 4,74,71,878/- and had deposited the same. Such TDS was made under various sections viz., sections 194C, 194H, 194J and 194I of the Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that tax amounting to Rs. 2,45,091/- was deducted at source under sections 195C, 194H and 194J of the Act, whereas the tax of Rs. 2,73,958/- was deducted at source under section 194I of the Act on rent expenses. He, accordingly, recorded a finding of fact that there was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... further found that the assessee had filed relevant details of the labour charges and no defect had been pointed out in the same. Considering the totality of the facts, the Commissioner (Appeals) found no logical basis for making lump sum disallowance at the rate of 5% and deleted the addition of Rs. 1,16,10,000/-. The Tribunal found that the assessee had deducted labour charges of Rs. 23.22 crore during the year under consideration as compared to Rs. 22.75 crore incurred in the immediately preceding year and further found that the rise in the labour expenses is only to the tune of Rs. 47 lakh which was higher by 2% from the expenses incurred in the immediately preceding assessment year and was of the opinion that this by itself could not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
