9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 581X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... odation provided at a lesser figure of rent than actually paid by the assessee to the lessor of the premises due to retrospective amendment - assessee employer is not hit by the retrospective insertion of Explanation (I) to S.17(2) thereof in the absence of any such extension of retrospective effect either in S.192 or S.201 of the Act as per the decision of the Hon'ble Privy Counsel in the case of Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co. Ltd. - The issue in favour of the assessee . - ITA Nos. 1722 to 1725/Hyd/08 - - - Dated:- 3-12-2009 - ORDER Per: G C Gupta: These four appeals by the assessee for the assessment years 2004-05 to 2007-08 are directed against the common order of the CIT (A). Since an identical issue is involved in all these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd valid cannot become illegal or invalid by any retrospective legislation. Explanation-1 to sec.17(2)(ii) of the Income tax Act, 1961 does not have the effect of making the appellant liable for any default when there was no default at all on its part as per the law then in force and applicable. The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the same. 7. Without prejudice, it is contended that the quantification of perquisite value at Rs.5,16,307 (for assessment year 2004-05; Rs.4,82,261 for assessment year 2005-06; Rs.17,48,490 for assessment year 2006-07 and Rs.18,48,929 for assessment year 2007-08) quantification of short deduction of tax at source at Rs.1,54,892 (for assessment year 2004-05; Rs.1,47,572 for assessment year 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon'ble High Courts, including the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Steel Executives Association Vs. Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Ltd . (241 ITR 20) (AP) would be neutralized. He submitted that the issue whether the assessee, in view of the amendment in law with retrospective effect from 1.4.2002, would be held as in default' for non-deduction of tax at source on the perquisite value of the concessional rental accommodation provided by it to its employees, is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Nagpur Bench of the Tribunal dated 20.6.2008 in a group of 56 cases of Canara Bank, Circle Office, Nagpur Vs. ITO Ward-8(3) Nagpur (ITA Nos.366 to 370/Nag/2007 for assessment years 2002-03 to 2006-07 and o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Amarchand (48 ITR 59) (SC) and Mother India (155 ITR 711) (at 718) and the decision of the Hon'ble Privy Counsel in the case of Delhi Cloth General Mills Co. Ltd. (2 ITC 439) (at 443) , and held that as far as the assessee employer is concerned, it is not hit by the retrospective insertion of Explanation (I) to S.17(2) thereof in the absence of any such extension of retrospective effect either in S.192 or S.201 of the Act. We, being in agreement with the decision of the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal cited supra, decide the issue in favour of the assessee and accordingly grounds of appeal of the assessee in these appeals are allowed. 7. In the result, all the four appeals of the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
