TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (2) TMI 586
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the assesse a company is engaged in the business of trading and giving on hire IT equipments like PC's, Laptop, servers, projectors etc. During the assessment proceeding the assessing officer while examining the party wise details of receipts and TDS made vis a vis the receipts shown in the proft and loss account found a difference of Rs. 6,65,330/-. On being asked by the assessing officer to reconcile the difference, the assessee submitted party wise list of gross receipts as per TDS certificate and as appearing in the profit and loss account. It was explained by the assessee that the difference pointed by the assessing officer is on account of 4% VAT payable on hire charge bill. The assessing officer, however, did not find merit in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the issue can be remitted back to the assessing officer for re-examination. 4. We have heard the parties and perused the material on record. As could be seen from the assessment stage itself the assessee has tried to explain the difference between the receipts as per TDS certificate and as per profit and loss account by explaining that the difference was due to 4% VAT element. In fact, we have noticed from the facts and material placed before us,the assessee has submitted before the A.O a list containing party wise details of receipts as per TDS certificate and as per profit and loss account to demonstrate the fact that the difference is on account of VAT. We have noticed, the assessing officer in the assessment order has admitted the fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... get better scales of economy. It was submitted, the directors have transferred their contracts, networks, and business assets without receiving any goodwill. Therefore, they were compensated by way of royalty. The assessee further submitted that since the directors have shown the royalty received as their income and have paid taxes any further disallowance in the hands of the company would amount to taxing the same income twice. The assessing officer however, rejected the explanation of the assessee by observing that no supporting evidences were submitted by the assessee to indicate that directors were instrumental in bringing business. The assessing officer observed, since the payment were made to related parties provisions of section 40A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....09-10 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted, as per the provision contend u/s 40A (2) (b) of the Act, assessing officer must form an opinion with regard to the reasonableness of payment made by the assesse. He submitted, in the case of the assessee no such opinion has been formed by the assessing officer to indicate that payment made by the assessee is unreasonable. He therefore submitted, disallowance was rightly deleted by the CIT (A). 6. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the materials on record. The fact that the directors of the company were running their proprietary business in the same line has not been controverted by the assessing officer. He has not disputed the fact that the directors ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 45,67,301/-. Briefly the facts are, during the assessment proceedings the assessing officer noticing that assessee has debited an amount of Rs. 45,67,901/- towards purchase of leased assets called for necessary detail and after verifying them found that the assessed has offered revenue from trading activity at Rs. 22,11,851/- and from hiring activity at of Rs. 1,63,72,661/-. From the aforesaid figures he found that major part of revenue is generated from hiring activity. Whereas, assessee has debited an amount of Rs. 73,65,319/- towards purchase cost. Looking at the nature of assessee's business he therefore called upon the assessee to justify the deduction claimed because in view of the assessing officer, such expenditure is of capital na....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the assessing officer. Ld. AR supported the finding of the CIT (A). 8. We have considered the submission of the parties and perused the materials on record. As could be seen, the assessing officer being of the view that the payments made by the assessee were towards purchase of assets has treated the expenditure as capital in nature. However, it is evident, assessee has brought material on record to demonstrate that it has brought on hire computers and peripherals from third parties and deduction claimed was on account of payment made to those parties towards hire charges. This fact is demonstrated from the TDS certificate submitted by the assessee before the departmental authorities. It is also a fact on record that assessee has dedu....