Both assessee and revenue are in appeal against the action of deletion of penalty u/s 271AAA. CIT (A) has deleted part of penalty levied but another part of the penalty was retained by him. Assessee is in appeal against the retention order and revenue is against the deletion of penalty.
S. 40(a)(ia) can be invoked only when the two conditions, namely, that tax is deductible at source and such tax has not been deducted is satisfied. Where tax is deducted by the assessee under a wrong provision of TDS and there is a shortfall, s.40 (a) (ia) disallowance cannot be made.
The Hon’ble Tribunal held that the property in question was sold by assessee’s late husband before his death and the receipts out of the sale proceeds are deposited in a joint bank account that of assessee and her late husband. Once this is the position the entire receipts are to be assessed in the hands of late husband although through legal heirs by adopting the procedure prescribed u/s. 159 of the Act.
The assessee was involved in power sector contracts and as per the terms and conditions of such work contract, an amount of 5 to 10% is used to deducted from the bills raised as retention money which would be payable to the assessee after successful completion of the commissioning of the project.
Second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) provides that where the assessee is not deemed to be assessee in default under the first proviso to sub-section (1) of section 201, then, for the purpose of this sub-clause, it shall be deemed that the assessee has deducted and paid the tax on such sum on the date of furnishing of return of income by the resident payee
Appeal of the revenue stands allowed and only the cost of theland has to be considered for calculating exemption u/s 54B no other expenses will be taken into account. So ITAT disallowed the expenses of leveling and filing of land and set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore that of A.O on this issue.
The assessee is engaged in manufacturing of plywood where imported timber is being used. During the relevant previous year assessee has imported wood logs from outside India. Assessee has made payment of Rs.32,46,905/- to the exporter on its sale these woods to the assessee on F.O.R. basis.
West Bengal State Electricity Distribution Company Limited (WBSEDCL) is covered by the exception Rule 6DD(b) of the IT Rules and as such no dis allowance under section 40A(3) of the Act can be made. Therefore, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.
The statement recorded by an officer on oath will be used as evidence in any proceeding, whereas statement recorded u/s. 133A has not given any evidentiary value because it was recorded by the authority, which has not been empowered to administer the oath to the assessee and take sworn statement.
Briefly stated facts are that the assessee claimed deduction for Rs.6,88,12,554/- and Rs.23,78,781/- being amount payable to EYGS LLP and Ernst & Young LLP, UK respectively towards reimbursement of costs for providing access to system & management audit methodology updates
