TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 38
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessing Officer under the head Consultancy Charges. 2(a) That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 24,71,024/- out of total addition of Rs. 1,07,34,202/- made by the Assessing Officer for alleged bills not in the name of the company. (b) That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law as well on facts and circumstances of the case in not considering a sum of Rs. 77,762/- for which appeal was filed before him which comprises in total addition made by the Assessing Officer under the head Bills not in the name of company. 3. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 13,74,534/- out of the total addition of Rs. 37,81,091/- made by the Assessing Officer for allegedly for non deduction of tax at source. 4. (a) That the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the case in confirming the addition of Rs. 54,88,74,888/- out of the total addition of Rs. 760,03,59,563/- made by the Assessing Officer under the head Sundry Balances Written off. (b) That the Ld. CIT(A) has committed as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, any/all the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." 4. We next notice that there arise same interconnected issues between the parties hereinabove as well. We thus proceed ground-wise for the sake of completeness and brevity. 5. Coming to the assessee's appeal ITA No. 535/Del/2019, its first and foremost substantive ground seeks to reverse both the learned lower authorities' respective findings disallowing consultancy charges of Rs. 7,47,524/- restricted to Rs. 1,47,764/- in the lower appellate discussion. The assessee's case all along is that the same pertains to service tax component wherein no TDS was required to be deducted. We make it clear that both the learned lower authorities have invoked the impugned disallowance in its hands on account of non-compliance to the TDS deduction provisions at his behest. Learned CIT(DR) further takes us to the CIT(A)'s lower appellate discussion holding the assessee not to have filed any supportive evidence regarding its foregoing service tax plea as well. We thus find no reason to interfere with the impugned disallowance which stands upheld in very ter....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in issue to M/s Magma Finance and M/s SREI Equipment Finance Limited; totaling to Rs. 13,74,534/- forming the precise issue before us. Learned counsel submits that it had duly placed on record the aforesaid latter entity's income tax return "ITR- V" of the relevant previous year itself that it had already accounted for the corresponding business income; and therefore, it is entitled for the consequential relief going by section 40(a)(ia) second proviso read with section 201(1) first proviso. There is no such compliance indicated from the aforesaid former payee M/s Magma Finance in its written synopsis as well. We thus uphold the impugned section 40(a)(ia) disallowance involving this former entity in very terms. We further deem it appropriate to direct the learned Assessing Officer to carry out finalize his necessary factual verification regarding the assessee's compliance to section 40(a)(ia) second proviso r.w.s 201(1) first proviso as well in accordance with law. This assessee's third substantive ground is partly accepted for statistical purposes. 8. The assessee's fourth substantive ground seeks to claim write off sundry balances written off inter alia involving M/s Charita ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(Rs.) 1. Allied Media Network Pvt. Ltd. 6,95,69,667 2. Deepak Agarwal 2,04,40,227 3. R. S. Enterprise 1,90,90,240 4. Omkar Realtors & Developers Pvt. Ltd. 1,19,43,826 Total 12,10,43,960 6.2 Regarding advance from M/s. Allied Media Network Pvt. Ltd. it was contended by the AR that it was actually an accounting entry because there was an agreement with M/s Allied Media Network Pvt. Ltd. for taking out advertisements and against the cost of advertisements, the land was to be sold this party. The AR further contended that possession of the land was given and sale deed was registered on 28.07.2015 and accordingly, the sale has been booked in AY 2016-17. There is no doubt that the date of transfer of land is taken as per registration of sale deed. Accordingly, the sale would be booked in AY corresponding to the date of registration deed. Therefore, this addition is deleted subject to verification by the AO that the sale has actually been booked in the AY 2016-17. 6.3 Regarding, the other three parties, it was contended the AR that the percentage of construction of the chalets was less than 30% and as per AS-7 the revenue would b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly; vide following detailed discussion: "7.1 Vide ground no. 8, the appellant has challenged the addition of Rs. 7,47,524/-. The AO made addition of Rs. 5,84,010/- by disallowing the deduction of the equivalent amount paid to M/s Prakash Harsukh Lal Saha because it was paid without deduction of TDS and addition of Rs. 1,63,514/- has been made because no supporting documents were produced. 7.2 During the present appellate proceedings, the AR stated that there was an agreement appointing the above stated Sh. Prakash Harsukh Lal Saha on monthly payment of Rs. 5,25,000/- (per month). The AR also furnished a consultancy agreement dt. 11.02.2014 (effective from 01.06.2013 till 31.05.2014) evidencing the same. Total sum of Rs. 47,25,000/- was paid for nine months and TDS was duly deducted. However, later on it was discovered that amount of service tax will also have to be paid on the same. The said sum of Rs. 5,84,010/- was service tax payable on the same and no TDS was deductable on service tax component. The AR also submitted a copy of screen short showing entries of consultancy charge of Rs. 47,25,000/- and of service tax receivable of Rs. 5,84,010/-. The AR stated th....