Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Karnataka High Court restrains Bengaluru-based Institute of Chartered Tax Practitioners India from enrolling candidates for its courses
 Attachment on Cash Credit of Assessee under GST Act: Delhi HC directs Bank to Comply Instructions to Vacate
 Income Tax Addition Made Towards Unsubstantiated Share Capital Is Eligible For Section 80-IC Deduction: Delhi High Court
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court

Ramu S. Deora Sambhav Chambers, 4th Floor Sir, P.M. Road, Fort Mumbai-400 001. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income tax Range 12(3) Mumbai.
April, 23rd 2014
              IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
                         "D" Bench, Mumbai

                Before Shri H.L. Karwa, President, and
                Shri N.K. Billaiya, Accountant Member

                         ITA No. 1704/Mum/2012
                         (Assessment year:2008-09)

Ramu S. Deora                              Dy. Commissioner of Income tax
Sambhav Chambers, 4th Floor                ­Range 12(3)
                                  Vs.
Sir, P.M. Road, Fort                       Mumbai.
Mumbai-400 001.

(Appellant)                                   (Respondent)

     Permanent Account No. : AAMPD 2141 H

                    Assessee by        :   Shri Nishit Gandhi
                    Revenue by         :   Shri Sanjeev Jain

       Date of hearing             :        17/04/2014
       Date of Pronouncement       :        17/04/2014

                                ORDER

Per N.K. Billaiya, Accountant Member:

      This appeal by the Assessee is preferred against the order of CIT(A)-
23, Mumbai dated 27/12/2011 pertaining to assessment year 2008-09.
The sole grievance of the Assessee is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming
disallowance of Rs.10,78,418/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) for non- deduction of TDS on
terminal handling charges.







2.    During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings AO noticed
that the Assessee has paid terminal handling charges amounting to
Rs.12,44,840/- to various parties who handled Assessee's export at the
terminal. The Assessee was asked to explain whether TDS was made on
these payments. It was explained that out of the total terminal handling
charges of Rs.12,44,840/-, Rs.1,66,422/- is covered by a certificate u/s.
                                      2                ITA No.1704/M/12
                                                           AY:08-09


197(1) of the Act and the balance has been paid without deduction of tax.
AO proceeded to make disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act and disallowed
Rs.10,78,418/-. The Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) but without
any success.


3.    Before us, the counsel for the Assessee stated that there was no
liability upon the Assessee to deduct tax at source on the alleged payment
because of the Board's Circular No.723 dated 19th September, 1995. Per
contra, the ld. DR relied upon the order of lower authorities.


4.    We have carefully perused the orders of the lower authorities and the
Circular of the Board No.723 dated 19/09/1995. The Circular relates to tax
deduction at source for payment made to foreign shipping companies and
at point No.5 the CBDT has clarified that since the agent acts on behalf of
the non-resident ship-owner or charterer, he steps into the shoes of the
principal. Accordingly, provisions of section 172 shall apply and those of
section 194C and 195 will not apply. A similar addition was deleted by the
Tribunal in ITA No.105/Mum/2013 dated 28/03/2014 wherein the
Tribunal has followed the CBDT Circular No.723 dated 19/09/1995. As the
payment is covered by the CBDT Circular we, therefore, set aside the order
of the CIT(A) and direct AO to delete the addition of 10,78,418/-.






5.    In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17th April, 2014.


               Sd/-                                Sd/-
         (H.L. KARWA)                        (N.K. BILLAIYA)
          PRESIDENT                       ACCOUNTANT MEMBER


Mumbai, Dated: 17/04/2014.
Jv.
                                  3               ITA No.1704/M/12
                                                      AY:08-09




Copy to: The Appellant
        The Respondent
        The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai
        The CIT(A) Concerned, Mumbai
        The DR " " Bench

True Copy
                                       By Order

                       Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2025 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting