TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds on printing and stationary expenses - amount already paid during the year or amount shown payable as on 31st March of every year - Held that:- After the amendment in section 40(a)(ia) of the Act with effect from 1.4.2015 it was held that disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act should be restricted to 30% of the amount of interest paid - Respectfully following the judgment of this Bench in the case of ACIT, Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Girdhari Lal Bargoti [2015 (11) TMI 746 - ITAT JAIPUR], the disallowance made by the A.O. u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act as raised in the grounds of appeal is deleted. Thus, the solitary ground of the assessee is allowed. Restrict the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act to 30% which comes to ₹ 11,400/- in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment year 2006-07 wherein the Tribunal has deleted such disallowance on the ground that the assessee company has derived benefit under the sales tax deferment scheme, therefore, no disallowance can be made. However, the Tribunal, following the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT; 15 ITJ 329 held that the disallowance can be made upto 50% of average investment of ₹ 88 lacs. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the assessee was asked to give the workikng of disallowance of interest under section 14A read with rule 8D of the IT Rules. The learned counsel for the assessee has given the calculation as under :- S.No. Name ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment year 2008-09 the Assessing Officer has made the addition of ₹ 1,52,000/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act under the head printing and stationary expenses . The Assessing Officer proved that the assessee has made payment of ₹ 1,52,000/- to Morya Printers for printing balance sheet, TDS not deducted, therefore, the entire amount of expenditure was disallowed. Similarly in the assessment year 2009-10 the Assessing Officer has disallowed ₹ 1,62,150/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 8. The matter was carried in appeal to the learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) has, following the order of ITAT, treated 25% of total expenses relating to works contract and liable for TDS. Therefore, the learned CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e are to views on an issue, the view in favour of the assessee has to be preferred. Therefore, we confirm the order of the ld. CIT(A). Further the recipient are NBFC, therefore, not possible to not be assessed to tax, these payments were related for A.Y. 2009-10 and return for A.Y. 2009-10 already might have been filed by these NBFC b y including these interest receipts as their income. Therefore, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A). 2.2 The ld. DR is heard. 2.3 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. Resectfully following the judgment of this Bench in the case of ACIT, Circle-4, Jaipur vs. Shri Girdhari Lal Bargoti (supra), the disallowance made by the A.O. u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
