9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in confirming the order passed by the Income Tax Officer (International Taxation), Bhopal [ITO, for short] u/s 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act). The learned CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the order passed by the ITO was invalid and bad in law being violative of principles of natural justice since the material relied on by the ITO was not provided to the appellant for verification/cross examination. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the appellant has defaulted in withholding of tax u/s 195 of the I.T. Act from payments made to Sorpa Disallowance Ticaret A.S. for purchase of equipment. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o non-residents during the financial year 2014-15 and 2015-16 without deducting of tax u/s 195 of the Act. In response thereto, a reply dated 4.6.2016 was filed. However, the A.O. finding discrepancies in the response of the assessee treated the assessee liable for deduction of tax u/s 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as 'the Act') and treated it as assessee in default. The A.O. thus made assessee liable for deduction of tax of Rs. 65,346/-, interest thereon of Rs. 17,643/- qua the financial year 2014-15 and in respect of financial year 2015-16 the A.O. made the assessee liable for TDS default u/s 195 of the Act of Rs. 21,05,883/- and interest thereon of Rs. 4,31,108/-. 3. Aggrieved against this, the assessee preferred ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he A.O. has given sufficient opportunity to the assessee. The claim of the assessee is without any basis that he was not given opportunity. He further contended that it was incumbent upon the assessee to prove that it was not liable for deduction of tax at source. Moreover, the assessee stated wrong facts regarding the transaction in question before the A.O. It was categorically stated that transactions have been carried out with the non-resident directly and no domestic agent was involved. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on records. We find that the assessee had taken a specific ground for not providing sufficient opportunity in the form of Ground No.1 in form No.35. Ld. CIT has duly reproduced t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
