ACIT 4(3), MUMBAI V. MUKESH BROKERAGE & FINANCIAL (I) LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 6028/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 71093 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 12-09-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 30-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Non-deduction of tax

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES B, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI H L KARWA, PRESIDENT & SHRI N K BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.6028/MUM/2011 FOR ASST. YEAR: 2006-07 THE ACIT 4(3), MUMBAI VS. MUKESH BROKERAGE & FINANCIAL (I) LTD., 102/C, MITTAL TOWER, 210 NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI- 400 021 PAN AAACM6481G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SURENDRA KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 12.09.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.09.2013 O R D E R PER N.K.BILLAIYA (AM) : THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS PREFERRED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-11, MUMBAI DATED 02.06.2011 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2006-07. 2. THE SOLE GRIEVANCE OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE CI T(A) ERRED IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE U/S. 40A(IA) FOR NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE ON VSAT, LEASE LINE CHARGES AND TRANSACTION CHARGES. DURING THE C OURSE OF SCRUTINY ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS DEBITED RS.1,21,200/-, RS.2,13,554/- AND RS.20,43,470/- ON ACCOUNT OF VSAT CHARGES, LEASE LINE CHARGES AND TRANSACTION CHARGES RESPECTIVELY. AS NO TDS WAS MADE THE 2 ITA NO.6028/MUM/2011 AY:2006-07 ASSESSING OFFICER DISALLOWED THESE PAYMENTS U/S 40A (IA) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) F OLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE MUMBAI BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S. KOTAK SECURITIES L TD. 25 SOT 450 AND IN THE CASE OF ANGEL BROKING LTD. 41 DTR 296 AND ALLOWED THE AP PEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THIS THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE U S. 3. THE DR COULD NOT BRING ANY DISTINGUISHING FACTS/ DECISION TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS OF THE CIT(A). AS THE ISSUES INVOLVED ARE WELL SETTLED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL AND WHICH HAS BEEN FOLLOWED BY THE CIT(A), WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE FIN DINGS OF THE CIT(A). THE APPEAL FILED REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER 2013. SD/- SD/- (H L KARWA) (N.K.BILLAIYA) PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DT : 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013 SA COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE C.I.T, MUMBAI 4. THE CIT (A)-11, MUMBAI 5. THE DR, B- BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI