TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 1203X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax in accordance with law that was in force, therefore, there was no failure on the part of the assessee to pay advance tax in accordance with provision of Sec. 208 and 209. In the case of Prime Securities [ 2010 (12) TMI 475 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] it is held that it was not possible for the assessee to anticipate the events that were to take place in next financial year and pay advance tax on the basis of those anticipated events. After considering all we observe that lower authorities had not controverted the facts reported by the assessee that because of uncertainty about the equity market it cannot estimate before hand amount of performance fees as discussed supra for the purpose of calculation of advance tax. No material has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. In doing so, the learned CIT (A) has failed to appreciate that the Appellant is engaged in the business of Portfolio Management Services The performance fees that the Appellant cars from its client could be ascertained only on the last day of the year based on the stock markets position as at the end on that day Hence, having regard to the volatility and uncertainty about the stock markets, it is impossible to estimate the performance fees that it will earn based on the stock markets as at the last date of the year 5. In view of the above, the learned CIT(A) be directed to re-calculate the interest under section 2340 of the Act after excluding Performance fees of Rs.12.13.63,859/- which is included in the income of Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel also submitted that it was impossible to estimate the performance fees as its earning will be based on the performance of the stock market upto the last date of the year. The ld. Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Kotak Securities Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Range 4(3) and in the case of ITAT, Mumbai, Ultratech Cement Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle 2(2), Hon ble High Court of Madras in the case of MRF Ltd. and ITAT , Mumbai, in the case of Kumari Kumar Advani (ITA No. 7661/Mum/2013). The ld. Counsel also submitted that in the assessment year 2008-09 ld. CIT(A) has adjudicated the issue in favour of the assessee. On the other hand, ld. D.R referred the provisions of Sec. 234C of the Act and supported the order lower ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dance with law that was in force, therefore, there was no failure on the part of the assessee to pay advance tax in accordance with provision of Sec. 208 and 209. In the case of Prime Securities as referred above it is held that it was not possible for the assessee to anticipate the events that were to take place in next financial year and pay advance tax on the basis of those anticipated events. After considering the findings of the ld. CIT(A) in the case of the assessee s case for assessment year 2008-09 and the finding of various judicial pronouncements as referred supra by the ld. Counsel, we observe that lower authorities had not controverted the facts reported by the assessee that because of uncertainty about the equity market it cann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
