2020 (8) TMI 679 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) - TDS not remitted within the due date as prescribed under the Act - HELD THAT - Substantial question of law has been answered against the revenue by the Supreme Court in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOLKATA Vs. CALCUTTA EXPORT COMPANY 2018 (5) TMI 356 - SUPREME COURT - Decided in favour of the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding disallowance of a sum.

Analysis:
The High Court of Karnataka heard an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, where the revenue challenged the deletion of a disallowance of a substantial sum made by the Assessing Authority under Section 40(a)(ia). The key question was whether the rigors of Section 40(a)(ia) could be attracted if the amount was paid in the next year, even though the Assessing Authority had disallowed it due to non-remittance of TDS within the prescribed due date. The Court framed this question of law to determine the applicability of the provision.

During the proceedings, the revenue's counsel acknowledged that the issue had been settled by the Supreme Court in the case of 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOLKATA Vs. CALCUTTA EXPORT COMPANY' (2018) 302 CTR 201 (SC), where the Supreme Court had ruled on a similar matter. The Supreme Court's decision was cited to support the argument that the substantial question of law in the present case should be answered against the revenue, in line with the precedent set by the higher court.

Based on the precedent and the settled interpretation of the law provided by the Supreme Court, the High Court concluded that the substantial question of law framed in the appeal was to be decided against the revenue and in favor of the assessee. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the decision to delete the disallowance made by the Assessing Authority under Section 40(a)(ia).