2018 (7) TMI 2068

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....27.12.2010 under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter 'the Act'). 2. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee Shri Rajan Vora, submitted that this is a recall matter and Tribunal in MA No. 719/Mum/2017 dated 31.05.2018 has recalled the matter regarding grounds No. 5 to 7 which is not been adjudicated. Hence, now only grounds No. 5 to 7 are to be adjudicated. 3. The only issue in these ground Nos. 5 to 6 of the assessee's appeal is as regards to the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of the AO in making disallowance of payments made to M/s Cox and Kings amounting to Rs. 8,24,13,778/-. For this assessee has raised the following ground Nos. 5 & 6 as under: - "Disallowance of payment made to CKIL u....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se. We find that assessee was in the initial phase of its business. Being in the initial phase of business the assessee was required to incur certain expenses in order to make its footprint in the tour and travel industry. Accordingly, the Assessee incurred expenses and overheads amounting to Rs. 8,24,13,778/- such as advertisement expenses, bandwidth charges, professional charges, consultancy charges, salaries, rent expenses, etc. Such expenses were directly related to the business of the Assessee and were required to be incurred by the assessee for running its business and making a place for itself in the tour and travel industry. CKL, being a sister concern of the assessee and being in the same line of business, extended assistance to th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... rent and repairs have been duly subjected to deduction of tax at source. The assessee has reimbursed the amount to M/s CKIL on which tax has already been deducted at source. Since the impugned payments have been made M/s CKIL on behalf of the assessee and the tax has been deducted at source there from by M/s CKIL, in my view, it should be construed that M/s CKIL has deducted tax at source also on behalf of the assessee. In this view of the matter, the obligation of the assessee to deduct tax at source has been fulfilled by M/s CKIL and hence I agree with the view taken by Ld CIT(A) that the provisions of sec. 40(a)(ia) would not get attracted in this factual matrix. Accordingly, I uphold the decision taken by Ld CIT(A) on the above said re....