SVC Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee filed its return of income on 28/09/2012 declaring total income at Rs.102,79,65,520/-. The return was selected for scrutiny assessment and accordingly, statutory notices were issued and served upon the assessee. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has debited to the profit and loss account, a sum of Rs.4,09,91,945/- being legal and professional charges, of Rs.3,27,49,392/- being Advertisement and Rs.1,44,44,127/- being networking expenses. The AO found that the assessee has not deducted tax at source on the impugned payments, therefore, invoking provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, the AO disallowed Rs.8,81,85,464/-. The assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) and pointed out that it is not the case of non-deduction of tax but it is a case of short deduction of tax at source to which provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, do not apply. After considering the facts and submissions, the ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to Rs.3,21,31,971/-. Before the ITAT, the ld. Counsel for the assessee drew attention to a chart containing details of the impugned payments along with remarks for non-deduction/short deduction of tax at source. It is the say of the ld. Counsel that because of inability to furnish necessary evidence before the lower authorities, the assessee could not defend its case properly and since now full details are available with the assessee, the same should be consi…

Legal Issues

• 1. The disallowance of expenses to the tune of Rs. 3,21,31,971 on the ground that tax was not deducted at source on these amounts in accordance with law.
• 2. Confirming the above disallowance without appreciating the fact that tax was properly deducted at source on these payments.
• 3. Confirming the above disallowance without appreciating the fact that in respect of certain expenses tax at source was not deductible at all.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Similar Judgements

• Deliverhealth Services Private Limited vs. DCIT, Circle 7 (1), Delhi

  Delhi Bench benchAY 2021-22Allowed

• Tapas Kumar Sarkar Vs. CIT(A), NFAC I.T.O., Ward-50(1), Kolkata

  Kolkata ‘D’ Bench benchAY 2012-13 & 2013-14Partly Allowed

• ITA No.203/Kol/2025

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2012-13Dismissed

• P.N. Memorial Neuro Centre and Research Institute Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 11(1)

  D Bench, Kolkata benchAY 2016-17Allowed

• The Advertising Corporation of India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata

  SMC Bench Kolkata benchAY 2014-15Partly Allowed

• Rajesh Jain Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Bhilai (C.G)

  Raipur bench