2016 (2) TMI 1076

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... )(ia) - assessee has deposited the tax deducted at source in contravention of the provisions of section 194A/194C/194H/194J - Held that:- Factual matrix incorporated in detail by the A.O in his assessment order at pages 7 to 17 clearly shows that the assessee has deposited the tax deducted at source before filing of the return of income which is 29.09.2009.The amendment brought to the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) by Finance Act, 2010 squarely apply. The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Virgin Creations [2011 (11) TMI 348 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] has held that the amendment in section 40(a)(ia) is retrospective. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Omprakash Chaudhary (2015 (2) TMI 150 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT) has als .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... O who was of the firm belief that since the assessee was showing rebate and discount expenses separately and since this amount has not been debited in that account, the same cannot be allowed. The A.O disallowed ₹ 13,95,966/-. Assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A) and once again claimed what has been stated before the A.O. Necessary details were filed. After considering the facts and the submissions and the relevant documentary evidences, the ld. CIT(A) was convinced with the claim and directed the A.O to delete the addition. 4. Aggrieved by this, the revenue is before us. The ld. D.R. strongly supported the findings of the A.O. The ld. counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the lower authoritie .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... urce before filing the return of income. The amended provisions of section 40(a)(ia) squarely apply. The ld. CIT(A) was convinced with the contention of the assessee and directed the A.O to delete the impugned disallowance. 9. Aggrieved by this, the revenue is before us. The ld. D.R. supported the assessment order. The ld. counsel for the assessee claimed that the issue is squarely covered in the favour of the assessee and again the revenue by the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Omprakash R. Chaudhary 57 Taxman.com 38. 10. A perusal of the factual matrix incorporated in detail by the A.O in his assessment order at pages 7 to 17 clearly shows that the assessee has deposited the tax deducted at source be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X