Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai

Hta Marketing Services P. Ltd, Mumbai vs Dcit 2(1), Mumbai on 25 July, 2019

              आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण "H " न्यायपीठ मब
                                                ुं ई में ।
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL " H" BENCH, MUMBAI

श्री महावीर स हिं , न्याययक        दस्य एविं श्री श्री एम बालगणेश, लेखा    दस्य के      मक्ष ।
         BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI M BALAGANESH, AM


                    आयकर अपील सुं . / ITA No. 4626/Mum/2018

                    ( यिर्ाा र ण   वर्ा / Assessment Year 2011-12)

  HTA     Marketing   Services                           The Dy. Commis sioner of
  Private Limited                                        Income Tax-2(1),
  3rd      Floor     Peninsular                          Aayakar   Bhavan,   M.K.
  Chambers, Ganpatrao Kadam                    Vs.       Road, Mumbai-400020
  Marg, Lower Parel,
  Mumbai-400 020


         (अपीलार्थी / Appellant)                  ..         (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)
                         स्र्थायी ले खा सुं . / PAN No. AAACF0692A


 अपीलार्थी की ओर     े   / Appellant   by     :        Aastha Shah, AR
 प्रत्यर्थी की ओर   े / Respondent by         :        Manoj Kumar Singh, DR

             ुिवाई की तारीख / Date of hearing:                   25.07.2019
           घोर्णा की तारीख / Date of pronouncement :             25.07.2019



                                       आदे श / O R D E R


 महावीर ससुंह, न्याययक सदस्य/
 PER MAHAVIR SINGH, JM:

This appeal of assessee is arising out of the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)]-4, Mumbai, [in short CIT(A)], in ITA No. CIT(A)-4/IT-205/DCIT.2(1)/2013-14 dated 21.03.2016. The Assessment was framed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-

ITA No . 4 6 26 / Mu m /2 0 18 2(1), Mumbai (in short DCIT/ITO/ AO) for the A.Y. 2011-12 vide order dated 31.01.2014, under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act').

2. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee as well as the learned Sr. DR stated that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order and for this assessee has raised the following grounds: -

"1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law erred in -

1.1 Passing the impugned appellate order as an "ex-parte order".

1.2 Passing the impugned appellate order without any papers and documents and without any submissions made before him.

1.3 Upholding the disallowance of Rs. 1,13,35,348/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act without appreciating the fact that since the payments made were in the nature of actual reimbursement of salaries on which appropriate tax had been deducted and deposited by the Hindustan Thompson Associates Nt. Ltd. ("holding company"), the provisions of Chapter XVII-B are not applicable and therefore the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are not applicable to the said payments.

ITA No . 4 6 26 / Mu m /2 0 18 1.4 Upholding that payments made to the Holding company were in the nature of fees for professional services and liable for deduction of tax at source u/s 194] of the Act though the payment was towards Secondment charges.

1.5 Without preiudice to the above and in the alternate:

Not appreciating that even otherwise, since the payment was towards reimbursement of salaries of seconded employees, tax would be deductible under section 192 of the Act and not under section 194J.

1.6 Without prejudice to the above and in the alternate:

Upholding the disallowance not appreciating the fact that where an assessee fails to deduct tax under Chapter XV! 1-13 on any sum but is deemed not to bean assessee in default under the first proviso of section 201, then for the purpose of this sub-clause it shall be deemed that the appellant had deducted and paid the tax thereon on the date of furnishing of return of income by the resident payee."

ITA No . 4 6 26 / Mu m /2 0 18

3. The learned Counsel for the assessee as well as the learned DR agreed that one more opportunity be given to the assessee to explain his case before CIT(A) and hence, the matter can be restored back to the file of the CIT(A). As both the parties conceded the position, we set aside the orders of CIT(A) and restore the matter back to his file for fresh adjudication on both the grounds.

4. In the result, the appeal assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 25.07.2019.

               Sd/-                                                         Sd/-
    (एम बालगणेश / M BALAGANESH)                                (महावीर स ह
                                                                         िं /MAHAVIR SINGH)
(लेखा    दस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER)                           (न्याययक     दस्य/ JUDICIAL MEMBER)

मुिंबई, ददिािंक/ Mumbai, Dated: 25.07.2019 सदीप सरकार, व.यिजी सधिव / Sudip Sarkar, Sr.PS आदे श की प्रयिसलपप अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. अपीलार्थी / The Appellant

2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent.

3. आयकर आयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)

4. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT

5. ववभागीय प्रयतयिधर्, आयकर अपीलीय अधर्करण, मिंब ु ई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai

6. गार्ा फाईल / Guard file.

आदे शािसार/ BY ORDER, त्यावपत प्रयत //True Copy// उप/सहायक पुंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, मुिंबई / ITAT, Mumbai