2014 (11) TMI 1000

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 14,33,110/- as transaction charges u/s 40(a)(ia)." 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee company is engaged in the business of providing stock broking services to its clients and is member of NSE and BSE. The assessee has paid sum of Rs. 14,33,110/- as transactions charges to stock exchange. However, the Assessment Year: 2008-09 assessee has not deducted TDS on such an amount paid. Before the AO, the assessee's case was that no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) can be made, because the ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Kotak Securities Ltd. Vs. ACIT ITA No. 1956/M/2008 has held that no TDS is to be deducted u/s 194 J. The assessing officer rejected the assessee's contention ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pport of this contention, he also Assessment Year: 2008-09 relied upon decision of ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of DCIT Vs. Anant Investments, ITA No. 6428/mum/2000. 4. On the other hand Ld. DR strongly relied upon the decision of the Ld. CIT(A). 5. We have heard the rival contention and also perused the relevant finding given in the impugned order. The assessee has paid transaction charges to the stock exchange on which TDS was not deducted. Such a non deduction of TDS was based on the fact and belief that in the earlier years also no TDS was deducted and department has accepted this position. This bona fide belief that no TDS is required to be deducted, was also based on decisions of ITAT Mumbai Benches, specially in the case of Ko....