Tribunal dismisses appeal on transfer fees but partly allows for fresh examination on disallowance.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal concerning the disallowance under Section 43B, ruling the provision for transfer fees as a contingent liability. However, it partially allowed the appeal for statistical purposes on the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), remanding the matter to the AO for a fresh examination.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

The assessee, engaged in the business of development and construction of buildings, made a provision of Rs. 12,00,000 for transfer fees payable to Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC). The AO disallowed this provision under Section 43B, stating that the liability had not crystallized and was a disputed contractual liability. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, emphasizing non-compliance with Section 43B(a) since the amount was not paid.

The Tribunal observed that the legality of BMC's demand for transfer fees was challenged in various writ petitions before the Bombay High Court, which ruled that BMC had no authority to claim such fees. The Tribunal noted that the demand was neither a statutory liability nor a contractual liability as per the lease deed. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the provision for transfer fees was a contingent liability and not deductible under Section 37(1) of the Act, dismissing the assessee's appeal on this ground.

2. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

The AO disallowed Rs. 3,02,575 for labor charges paid by the assessee, invoking Section 40(a)(ia) due to non-deduction of tax at source under Section 194C. The assessee argued that as an individual, it was not required to deduct tax at source under the then-prevailing Section 194C(1). The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, stating that the assessee was liable to deduct tax at source.

The Tribunal noted that the assessee, being a builder and developer, claimed that the payments were made in the capacity of a builder and not as a contractor. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument that the amended Section 194C, which included individuals under tax audit, came into effect from 01-06-2007, after the relevant assessment year. The Tribunal set aside the issue to the AO for de-novo determination, instructing the AO to verify whether the payments were made in the capacity of a builder and developer, and not as a contractor, and to grant the assessee an opportunity to present evidence.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal regarding the disallowance under Section 43B, holding the provision for transfer fees as a contingent liability. However, it partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes on the issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia), remanding the matter to the AO for fresh examination.

---