2011 (4) TMI 1385

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....377; 3,67,58,515. The final taxable income was ascertained at ₹ 3,77,76,730. The AO made a disallowance of ₹ 7.50 lakhs u/s 40(a(ia) of the Act. The AO examined the debit balance of ₹ 3.55 crores under the head "commission". On verification of the details of the commission, it was found that no tax had been deducted on the following commissions: 1. RDX Impex & Sales Promotion Ltd. ₹ 50,000 2. SRS Buildcon P. Ltd. ₹ 7,00,000 3. By virtue of the impugned order, the CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of ₹ 7 lakhs. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal. 5. Challenging the impugned order, the Ld.Counsel for the assessee has contended that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the disallowance wrongly ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....00" 9. In Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd.(supra), it has been held, inter alia, that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act provided in nondeduction of amount which remains payable to a resident in respect of fees for technical services, etc.; that it is not applicable where expenditure is paid; that it is applicable only in cases where the payments are due and outstanding; that the word "payable" is not defined, though the word "paid" is defined u/s 43(2) of the Act to mean "actually paid" or "incurred"; that hence, by implication, the word "payable" does not include "paid"; that the difference in "paid" and "payable" is also there in the Rules for depositing the TDS and also for levy of interest u/s 234, where interest is worked ....