The Tribunal held that deduction of tax at source under Section 194C is required to be made on “any sum paid” by the assessee to clearing and forwarding agent and it includes reimbursement of the expenditure: Calcutta High Court.
The Judgment in the case of Surendra Commercial & Exim Pvt vs Income Tax Officer (ITA NO. 45 OF 2010) was served by THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA
FACTS OF THE CASE:
This appeal by the assessee filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, (the Act, for brevity) is directed against the order dated 27.11.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal “B” Bench, Kolkata in I.T.A. No. 853/Kol/2009 for the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee has raised the following substantial question of law for consideration:- ITAT/45/2010 “Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and on law the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in granting relief to the assessee on account of claim of additional depreciation U/s. 31(1)(iia) of the said Act of Rs.77,78,79,369/- disallowed by the Assessing Officer as the Provision came into effect subsequent to the year under consideration in respect of the business of generation and distribution of power, in which the assessee was engaged?
JUDGEMENT:
This Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act cannot be called upon to reexamine the facts or to re-appreciate the tenor and ambit of the document which was placed before the Assessing Officer, CITA and more importantly the Tribunal has noted that the assessee has failed to establish the reimbursement which was pleaded by producing document despite opportunity being given at the appellate stage. Thus, we find that there is no question of law, much less substantial question of law arising for consideration in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal being ITA No.45 of 2010 fails and dismissed.
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY AKANKSHA