Latest Expert Exchange Queries
sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Service Tax | Sales Tax | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Indirect Tax | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing
Popular Search: cpt :: list of goods taxed at 4% :: articles on VAT and GST in India :: VAT RATES :: VAT Audit :: Central Excise rule to resale the machines to a new company :: ARTICLES ON INPUT TAX CREDIT IN VAT :: ICAI offer Get Windows 7,Office 2010 in Rs.799 Taxes :: form 3cd :: empanelment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARDS :: TDS :: due date for vat payment :: ACCOUNTING STANDARD :: TAX RATES - GOODS TAXABLE @ 4%
« From the Courts »
  Dr. Gautam Sen vs. CCIT (Bombay High Court)
 Dr. Gautam Sen vs. CCIT (Bombay High Court)
 DCIT vs. Shivshankar R. Sharma (ITAT Mumbai)
 ACIT vs. Jawaharlal Agicha (ITAT Mumbai)
 CIT vs. M/s. D. Chetan & Co (Bombay High Court)
 Makes further amendments to Notification no. 157/90-Customs dated 28th March, 1990 regarding temporary admission under the ATA Carnet
 Appointment of Common Adjudicating Authority by DGRI - 2/2016-Customs
 ransfers Of Hon’ble Members Of The ITAT (September 2016)
 M. G. Contractors Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
 Haryana State Road & Bridges Development Corporation Ltd vs. CIT (P&H High Court)
 Dharamshibhai Sonani vs. DCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

DCIT, Circle 22(1), New Delhi Vs. Shri Sidharth Sahni, F-89/5, Okhla Indl. Area, Phase I, New Delhi.
November, 11th 2014
                (DELHI BENCH `G ', NEW DELHI)

                       I.T.A. No. 5422/Del/2010
                       Assessment year : 2005-06
DCIT, Circle 22(1),                 Vs.        Shri Sidharth Sahni,
New Delhi                                      F-89/5, Okhla Indl. Area,
                                               Phase ­ I, New Delhi.
         (Appellant)                      (Respondent)

                   Appellant by :      Shri BRR Kumar, Sr. DR
                   Respondent by :     Shri Kapil Goel, Adv.



      This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A)
dated 21.09.2010. The revenue is aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A)
by which he had deleted the addition of Rs.9,13,562/- made by the A.O. u/s
40(a)(ia) for non deduction of TDS.
2.    At the outset, the Ld. D.R. submitted that Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly
allowed the relief and he heavily relied upon the order of the A.O.
3.    On the other hand, Ld. A.R. heavily relied upon the order of Ld.
CIT(A) and submitted that Ld. CIT(A) after having noted that provisions for
tax deduction at source were not applicable to the individual in the year
under consideration, has rightly deleted the addition.
4.    We have hard rival parties and have gone through the material placed
on record. We find that the assessee in this appeal is an individual. During
                                        2               ITA No.5422/Del/2010

ht year under consideration, he made certain contractual payments. The
A.O. disallowed the payments holding that the assessee had not deducted tax
at source. Ld. CIT(A) on the other hand has given relief holding that
provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) were not applicable to individual in the year
under consideration. Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition by holding as
         "{6} During the course of appellate proceedings the Authorized
         Representative of the appellant submitted that the provisions of
         section 194C governing the deduction of tax at source are not
         applicable to individual assesses for Assessment Year 2005-06 and
         the amendment to section 194C has been brought about w.e.f.
         01.06.2007. I have gone through the provisions of section 194C and it
         is apparent that the claim of the assessee in this regard is absolutely
         correct. The onus to deduct tax at source has been put on the
         individuals only from Assessment Year 2008-09 in respect of any
         payment to contractors. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has
         erroneously applied the provisions of section 194C in the case of the
         assessee for ay 2004-05 and a such addition made u/s 40(a) to the
         tune of Rs.9,13,652/- is deleted."

5.       From the perusal of the above, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has passed a
reasoned and speaking order and has rightly deleted the addition, which
requires no interference.
6.       In view of the above, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
7.       Order pronounced in the open court on 31st Oct., 2014.

         Sd./-                                                     Sd./-
 ( I. C. SUDHIR)                                     (T.S. KAPOOR)
JUDICIAL MEMBER                                 ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Date: 31st Oct., 2014
                                 3            ITA No.5422/Del/2010

Copy forwarded to:-
   1. The appellant
   2. The respondent
   3. The CIT
   4. The CIT (A)-, New Delhi.
   5. The DR, ITAT, Loknayak Bhawan, Khan Market, New Delhi.
True copy.
                                                    By Order

                                                 (ITAT, New Delhi).

S.No.             Details            Date     Initials Designation
  1   Draft dictated on              29.10.14           Sr. PS/PS
  2   Draft placed before author     29.10.14           Sr. PS/PS
      Draft proposed & placed
  3                                                      JM/AM
      before the Second Member
      Draft discussed/approved
  4                                                      AM/AM
      by Second Member
      Approved Draft comes to the
  5                                                     Sr. PS/PS
      Sr. PS/PS
  6   Kept for pronouncement                            Sr. PS/PS
  7   File sent to Bench Clerk    31/10/2014            Sr. PS/PS
      Date on which the file goes
      to Head Clerk
      Date on which file goes to
 10   Date of Dispatch of order
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2016 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Binarysoft Technologies - Our Experience

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions