SANAT M DALAL SECURITIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A)-14, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5568/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 October 2016AY 2008-092 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that transaction charges paid to the stock exchange are for providing facilities and not fees for technical services. Therefore, no tax deduction at source was required under Section 194J.

What were the facts?

The assessee paid transaction charges to the stock exchange and did not deduct tax at source. The Assessing Officer treated the assessee as in default for non-deduction of TDS under Section 194J.

What were the issues?

Whether transaction charges paid to the stock exchange are liable for TDS under Section 194J as fees for technical services.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201(1),Section 201(1A),Section 194J

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM)& Ramlal Negi (JM)

For Appellant: Shri N.S. Bhimani
For Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar
Hearing: 3.10.2016Pronounced: 3.10.2016

O R D E R Per B.R. Baskaran (AM) :-

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 24.6.2016 passed by learned CIT(A)-14, Mumbai for A.Y. 2008-09 confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act.

2.

We have heard the parties and perused the record. The Assessing Officer treated the assessee as assessee in default since the assessee did not deduct tax at source on the transaction charges paid to the stock exchange. The Assessing Officer took the view that the assessee should have deducted tax at source u/s. 194J of the Act on the amount of ` 4,37,645/- paid by the assessee to the stock exchange. Accordingly the Assessing Officer raised the demand u/s. 201(1) of the Act and levied interest u/s. 201(1A) of the Act. Learned CIT(A) also confirmed the same.

2 Sanat M. Dalal Securities P. Ltd.

3.

We have noticed that the above said issue has since been decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in favour of the assessee in the case of CIT Vs. Kotak Securities Ltd. (2016) 384 ITR 1, wherein it was held that the transaction charges paid to the stock exchange is for providing facility and it is not fees for technical services and hence no tax is required to be deducted u/s. 194J of the Act. Accordingly, following the decision rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court(supra), we set aside the order passed by learned CIT(A) and direct the Assessing Officer to delete the impugned demand raised upon the assessee u/s. 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act.

4.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.

Order has been pronounced in the Court on 3.10.2016

More judgments on Section 201(1)

All 3,835 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →