9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee is a partnership firm and conducts transport business. It carries transportation works for Shri J.N.Pattnaik of Keonjhar for transporting iron ore from mines at Kora Centre to Paradeep Port. The assessee filed returned of income showing ₹1,61,214 claiming refund of ₹ 6,92,707.Notice u/s.147/148 was issued when the Assessing Officer sought to hold that income had escaped assessment as the assessee had received transport works orders of ₹3.32 Crores from Shri J.N. Patanaik of Keonjhar towards execution of transport contract had not deducted tax at source when the payments were made. He observed that the assessee had deducted ₹4,73,620 on 31.3.2007 and deposited the said sum into Central Government account on 25.10.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... identical in all respects and when the ratio of the said cases should have been followed while deciding the assessee‟s case. The learned Counsel for the assessee further contended that when deduction of tax is made during the last month of the previous year, no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act is envisaged if the tax is deposited on or before the due date of filing of return of income. He submitted that the learned CIT(A) erred in law in not dealing with the submission of the assessee that in view of the affirmation by the legislature through the Memorandum to the Finance Bill, 2010 as to what is the current law pertaining to section 40(a)(ia) which clearly stipulates that no disallowance can be made when deduction of tax is made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that Assessing Officer had rejected appellant‟s reply dated 19.11.2009 by passing a non-speaking order without assigning any valid reasons. He is also not justified to reject the contention of the assessee that payment of a sum cannot be equated with expenditure of the same amount and that no disallowance can be made when there has been no loss of revenue to the state and the objectives of section 40(a)(ia) have been complied with. The learned AR of the assessee contended that the State cannot unjustly enrich itself purely on technical ground. He further argued that the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) is not applicable when amount has already been paid‟ and it is only applicable when the amount is payable‟. On the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hardship faced by the assessees for deduction of tax at source by taking into consideration where the amount was subjected to tax at source in the coming eleven months. The case laws cited by the learned Counsel before the Assessing Officer as well as before the learned CIT(A) are therefore, directly applicable to the assessee‟s case insofar as the various amendments in the said Section 40(a)(ia) related to the consideration of the fact that the tax credit available to the contractees was to be available in the last month of the financial year when the tax deduction certificate was issued. The learned Counsel for the assessee before us has submitted that the remedy of non-deduction of tax at source on the quarterly payment had alread ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
