TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (1) TMI 343
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... various other reasons and hence the same kindly be deleted. 2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in passing the impugned order in a haste without affording adequate and reasonable opportunity of being heard. The impugned order having been framed in gross breach of natural justice, kindly be quashed or alternatively be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A). 3. Rs. 7,04,430:- In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the law the ld. A.O. has erred in disallowing a sum of Rs. 7,04,430/- U/s 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld A.O. is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the said disallowance of Rs. 7,04,430/- U....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der that various notices were issued, however, the assessee did not receive any of the alleged notice due to the reason that there was a change of address and the assessee has duly mentioned the current address of the assessee in the Form No. 35 but the ld. CIT(A) appears to have issued the notice at the old address. The ld AR has further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2012-13 and 2013-14 vide orders dated 29/08/2018 and 01/08/2018 respectively deleted the identical addition made by the Assessing Officer U/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Thus, the issue was found by the ld. CIT(A) as covered in favour of the assessee by the various decisions including the decisions of this Tribunal. Hence, the ld. AR has submitted that the disallowanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....Y. 2012-13 and 2013-14 has considered an identical issue and decided the same in favour of the assessee. For the A.Y. 2012-13, the ld. CIT(A) has dealt this issue in para 4 as under: "4. Ground No. 1 This ground is related to the addition of Rs. 16,00,697/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act. This issue dealt by the Assessing officer in assessment order as under:- 4.1 This reply has been perused and found general in nature. It is admitted facts that the assessee has not deducted TDS on payment of commission more than Rs. 5000/- to the retailers. The submission of the assessee that M/s Idea Cellular Ltd. have already deducted TDS as per the provisions of section 19411 on behalf of the assessee on commission' paid to the retailers to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ible at source under chapter XII-B and Sales Rules, 1987, for surrender of Stamp Papers to Government - Provision would not render stamp Vendors Agents - Transaction amount to sale-Discount on sale of stamp paper does not attract section 194H - Income Tax Act, 1961, S. 194H. 13.3 CIT(TDS) Vs. United Breweries Ltd [2017] 80 taxmann.com 123 (Andhra Pradesh and Telangana) Section 194H of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deduction of tax at source - Commission or brokerage etc. (Trade incentives) - Assessment years 2008- 09 to 2010-11 - There being no relationship of a principal and agent between assessee and retailers, trade incentives paid by assessee to retailers through del-credere agents in order to boost its sale could not be treated as com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of the A/R of the appellant that the alleged payment of commission was not paid by the assessee to the retailers but it was directly paid by the mobile operator whose SIM card and pre-paid coupons were sold by the assessee. Therefore, the assessee was not under obligation to deduct TDS on such amount. He has further contended that since the assessee is a dealer, only for accounting purposes the assessee has made contra entries in respect of the said amount being receipts as well as payments whereas there is no actual payment by the assessee but it was paid by the company. For this ratio the A/R of the appellant relied upon various case laws as discuss above. Therefore considering the above observation and following the case laws discus....