9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 440X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt have arbitrarily been rejected. 2. That the Learned Hon'ble Commissioner while disallowing the said payment of Rs.2,62,394/- on account of delayed payment of TDS has failed to observe that the appellant has deposited the said amount before due date of filing of return or Income. 3. The Learned officer failed to appreciate the amendment in section 40(a)(ia) has been held retrospective in nature to be made applicable from 01.04.2005 as per decisions of various authorities, 4. That the action of Learned Hon'ble Officer should not be sustained on grounds of justice. " 2. Facts, in brief, as per relevant orders are that return declaring income of Rs.49,203/- filed on 31st October, 2007 by the assessee, after being processed u/s 143 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x deductible and deducted in the last month of the previous year. Whereas in this case, tax was deducted on various dates during the year, and not in the last month, and was therefore required to be deposited within the year, i.e. on or before 31.03.2007. The appellant has sought relief under an unnamed decision of the ITAT, Delhi, however, no such case has been cited. The reliance on the judgment of Teja Constructions vs. DCIT [2010] 36 DTR 220 (Hyd), is also misplaced. In the appellant's case, the tax deducted remained payable at the end of the year. The ITAT, Hyderabad held in that case that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) are applicable only in respect of outstanding expenses on which TDS has not been made. In this case, the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her hand, the ld. DR supported the findings of the ld. CIT(A). 5 We have heard both the parties and gone through the facts of the case. Indisputably, the assessee deposited TDS on contractual payments of Rs.1,90,866/- in terms of provision of section 194C of the Act and on professional/technical payments of Rs.71,528/- in terms of provision u/s 194J of the Act, on 29th May, 2007 i.e. before the due date of filing the return on 31st October, 2007. The issue before us in this case is as to whether amendment made to the provisions of section 40a(ia) of the Act by the Finance Act,2010, would apply with retrospective effect from 1.4.2005 or w.e.f 1.4.2010. We find that various co-ordinate Benches of the ITAT in their decision dated 16.12.2010 i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the opinion that the amendment to the provisions of Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act, by the Finance Act, 2010 is applicable retrospectively from 1.4.2005. Consequently, any payment of tax deducted at source on or before the due date for filing return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act, cannot be disallowed in terms of provisions of sec.40a(ia) of the Act. Indisputably, in the instant case the assessee deposited the tax deducted at source on 29.5.2007 i.e. before the due date for filing return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act . In this situation, especially when the Revenue have not brought to our notice any contrary decision, we are not inclined to interfere with the findings of the ld. CIT(A).In view thereof, ground nos.1 to 3 in the appeal are al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
