2018 (5) TMI 1481

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... liable to be deleted in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned C.I.T.(A) should have deleted the addition of Rs. 2,24,662.00 made by the learned A.O on application of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, when the impugned section has no application under the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 3. For that, the learned C.I.T.(A) should have deleted the addition of Rs. 11,24,266.00 made by the learned A.O on application of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, when the impugned section has no application under the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 4. For that the learned C.I.T.(A) has committed gross error of law in confirming additions of Rs. 2,24,662.00 and Rs. 11,24,266.00 made by the learned A.O ignoring the explan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ified. This has not been done by the appellant. 6. Ld A.R. reiterated the submissions made before the CIT(A) and ld D.R. supported the order of the CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower authorities and materials available on record. We find that the Mumbai Bench Á' of the Tribunal in the case of Karwat Steel Traders vs ITO, 145 ITD 370 (Mum) has held as under: "The amount cannot be allowed as deduction only in the event when tax is deductible at source under Chapter XVII-B and such tax has not been deducted or, after deduction has not been paid. In this case, the assessee was to deduct tax under provisions of section 194A. Section 194A is further qualified by the provisions of section 197A( 1....