TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1618
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act'). The relevant assessment year is 2011-12. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income showing a total income of Rs. 26,18,310/- under the normal provisions and Rs. 1,46,26,148/- under provisions of section 115JB of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act after making disallowances of Rs. 1,32,540/- u/s 14A and Rs. 40,19,608/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 2.1 On appeal by the assessee the Ld. CIT (A) deleted both the additions made by the A.O. 2.2 Now aggrieved the department has approached the ITAT and has challenged the deletions by the Ld. CIT (A). 3. The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that as far as the disallowance of Rs. 40,19,608/- was concern....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e case of Kotak Securities Ltd. vs. DCIT (TDS), in ITA No. 6657/Mum/2011 vide order dated 3rd February, 2012, had held that a plain reading of Explanation to section 194H indicated that element of agency was essential in case of all services or transactions contemplated by Explanation to section 194H and further that those transactions or services which were on principal to principal basis would not be governed by the provision requiring deduction of tax at source. Reliance was also placed on order of ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Baidynath Ayurved Bhawan Ltd. vs JCIT reported in 83TTJ 409 and ACIT vs. The Samaj reported 71 TTJ 783. Reliance was also placed on judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Stamp Vendo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of a specified amount to the beneficiary on demand and it is in consideration of this commitment that the bank charges of fee which is termed as 'bank guarantee commission'. The ITAT Mumbai Bench has further noted that while it is termed as 'guarantee commission', the same is not in the nature of commission as it is understood in common business parlance and in context of section 194H. The ITAT Mumbai Bench went to hold that no TDS was deductible on such bank guarantee commission. It is seen that the Ld. CIT (A) also has relied on this order of ITAT Mumbai Bench while allowing relief to the assessee and, further, during the course of proceedings before us, the department could not point out any contrary judgement which could give relief to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmissioner of Income Tax-I Vs. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [2014] 223 Taxmann 130 (Guj.). The third decision is of the Allahabad High Court in Income Tax Appeal No. 88 of 2014, Commissioner of Income Tax. (Ii) Kanpur, Vs. M/s. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. decided on 05.05.2014. In the said decision it has been held: "As regards the second question, Section 14A of the Act provides that for the purposes of computing the total income under the Chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act. Hence, what Section 14A provides is that if there is any income which does not form part of the income under the Act, the expenditure which....