AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 1697
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... context, the Ld. A.R. of the assessee while referring to the affidavit filed in support of condonation of delay submitted that the delay was occurred due to the fact that her earlier accountant Mrs. Vinita Fernandes left the job who was looking after the taxation issues and only the new accounted brought to my notice that appeal has not been filed and was filed immediately. The learned counsel contended before us that the delay in filing the appeal was attributable to the reasons which were beyond the control of the assessee and therefore the same should not be result in depriving the assessee from seeking justice. The ld AR requested the bench to condone the delay which was strongly opposed by the ld DR by submitting that the reason....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law the learned Assessing Officer has erred in ignoring and the learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the non consideration of form 26A u/r 31 ACB and the certificate of account in annexure A as provided u/s. 201(1) of the Act filed on record and in not holding that provisions of section 40 (a)(ia) as amended are applicable to the appellant on account of the trade discount and share of commission amounting to Rs. 1022888/- allowed/ paid to VAV Air conditioning by the appellant. The Appellant craves leave to add to, alter, delete or substitute any of the above Grounds of Appeal." The ground No.1 has been amended by the assessee vide letter dated 06.05.2019 and has b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....egating to Rs. 12,51,858/-. According to the AO, the assessee has not deducted and deposited TDS within stipulated time. The assessee submitted before the AO that assessee has deducted TDS and deposited in A.Y. 2013-14 and not in the current assessment year. Thereafter the AO rejected the claim of the assessee by disallowing the same under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 6. In the appellate proceedings, the Ld. CIT(A) also dismissed the appeal of the assessee by upholding the disallowance by holding that the AO has rightly invoked the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act as the assessee has failed to deduct and deposit the TDS either during the financial year nor up to the date of filing the return of income. 7. At the outset, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tted that in the case of M/s. Asphalt India Corporation vs. DCIT (supra) it has been held that amendment to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act vide Finance (2) Act, 2014 was retrospective in nature and therefore covers the instant year also. Similarly, in the case of Pr.CIT vs. Perfect Circle India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) has held that with reference to insertion of 2nd proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that section 40(a)(ia) is not a penalty and insertion of 2nd proviso is declaratory and curative in nature and would have retrospective effect from the date when the main proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted i.e. 01.04.2005. 8. The Ld. D.R. relied on the order of authorities below. 9. After hearin....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e equal to 30% of the total expenses. The ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 10. The issues raised in ground No.1B, 2 & 3 are interconnected and are against the order of Ld. CIT(A) confirming the addition of Rs. 10,22,888/- as made by the AO towards the disallowance of trade discount of Rs. 5,42,350/- and commission paid of Rs. 4,80,538/-to VAV Air Conditioning a proprietary concern of the assessee's husband. 11. The facts in brief are that the AO after perusal of schedule 18 of tax audit report observed that assessee has shared commission income to the tune of Rs. 10,22,888/- with her husband Shri Adarsh Pal in the proprietary concern VAV Air Conditioning. Accordingly, the AO issued a show cause notice to the assessee as to wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e sister concern VAV Air Conditioning whereas the remaining amount of Rs. 4,80,538/- was paid as share of commission. No TDS was deducted from both the payments. 14. After taking into account the facts of the case and arguments of both the parties, we are of the view that the entire amount is paid to the sister concern without any deduction of TDS during the year and therefore as has been held by us in the ground No.1A (supra) the disallowance has to be restricted to 30% of the said expenditure. We are not convinced with the arguments of the ld DR that the genuineness of payments are in doubt as the payments were made to the related parties without proving the nature of services rendered. The ld DR also stressed the point that reasonabil....