TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (8) TMI 574
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1.4% of loan amount received. During the year, the holding company has provided corporate guarantee for the loans from institutions such as Shinhan Bank, Citi Bank, Standard Chartered Bank, Korea Exchange Bank, etc. On perusal of the guarantee agreement, the Assessing Officer has noted that the guarantee limit was a sum of $39,155,000 USD and also for the period from 01.01.2014 to 31.12.2014 which would be automatically extended by 1 year as long as there was no appeal. Following conditions are laid down by the said agreement: i. The guarantee rate shall be 1.40% which shall be renewed every three years. ii. The fee shall be calculated as Actual loan "days of loan/365(366) x rate. iii. The fee shall be charged on the last day of the fiscal year. iv. The fee has to be mandatorily paid three month from the date of invoice. v. Method of payment shall be such that the cash would be paid in full. During the course of scrutiny, the assessee was asked to furnish the breakup and working of guarantee fees paid and on examination of the details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer has noticed that the assessee has claimed certain amount....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed to furnish details of the tax deducted on guarantee fee and to also substantiate the fact that the appellant had not claimed guarantee fees twice as stated by the A.O. The written submissions filed by the appellant are as follows: "The Appellant has claimed a sum of Rs.4,71,52,666/- as guarantee fee for the Financial Year 2014-15 and Rs.2,22,94,179/- as guarantee fee for the Financial Year 2013-14. In this connection, we would like to submit the following tabulation: S. No. Particulars Financial year Amount TDS Remarks 1 Guarantee Fee 2013-14 2,22,94,179 22,29,418 TDS Challan is enclosed herewith Total 2,22,94,179 22,29,418 2 Guarantee Fee 2014-15 2,20,38,516 22,03,852 TDS Challan is enclosed herewith 3 Guarantee Fee 2014-15 2,51,14,140 25,11,414 TDS Challan is enclosed herewith Total 4,71,52,666 47,15,266 For the Financial Year 2013-14, the Appellant Company has remitted a higher sum of Rs.2230543/- to the credit of the central government whereas the amount to be remitted is only Rs,22,29,418/-. Appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t from the banking institutions. While submitting the summary of borrowings; the appellant furnished details of borrowings from the various Banks such as amount of guarantee fee, date of sanction of loan and date of closure of loan. It was also explained that "during the F.Y.2013- 14, guarantee fee to the extent of 0.87% out of 1.73% was booked in the F.Y. 2013-14. The invoices for the 0.86% i.e. for the sum of Rs.2,20,38,517/- was received only in the next F.Y. 2014-15. The appellant also furnished evidences to leverage its claim that it had deducted TDS and remitted the same to the credit of the Government in the year in which the company had accounted for the expense. It was also clarified that the appellant had not claimed guarantee fees twice as the sum of Rs.4,71,52,666/- which was claimed as guarantee fee for the F.Y. 2014-15 includes the guarantee fee for the F.Y. 2013-14 which amounts to Rs.2,20,38,517/-. It was also declared that the appellant company and the holding company had agreed for a contracting period as calendar year since the calendar year is the financial year for the Korean company. Taking into account the facts, circumstances and the evidences furni....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 6. The next ground raised in the appeal of the Revenue relates to deletion of disallowance of delayed payment of EPF and ESI dues. In the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has noticed that the assessee has made delayed payments of employee contributions of EPF to the tune of Rs..20,07,225/- and ESI to the tune of Rs..1,16,946/- beyond due dates of remittance. Accordingly, the above total sum of Rs..21,24,171/- was disallowed under section 36(1)(va) of the Act and brought to tax. On appeal, By following the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. Industrial Security and Intelligence Private Limited in Tax Case Appeal Nos. 585 & 586 of 2015 dated 24.07.2015, the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to allow the deduction to the extent payments are made within due date of filing of return of income. 7. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. By relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in WP No.5264 of 2018, the ld. DR pleaded for reversing the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 8. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue is ....