Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (1) TMI 1064

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... time barred as per limitation given under section 201(3). 2. The learned A.O has erred on law and facts by passing order in haste without giving any opportunity of being heard and is against the principle of natural justice. 3. That the learned AO has erred on law and facts by passing Order under section 201(1) and 201(1A) which is bad in law as section 201(1) and 201(1A) are for failure to deduct tax and not for defects in the form 15G/15H. 4. The Learned ACIT has erred in that before invoking the Provisions of Section 201(1) the learned ACIT has not verified whether tax on the said payment has been already paid by the payee or not. 5. The assessing officer has erred in appraising the fact that assessee has already deposited t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Act, dated 29.03.2018 is barred by limitation. Admittedly, as per sub-section (3) to Section 201 of the Act, the time limit for passing an order under sub-section (1) to Section 201 i.e deeming a person to be an assessee-in-default for failure to deduct the whole or any part of the tax from a person resident in India, in a case where the statement referred to in Section 200 was filed by the assessee prior to 01.10.2014, was 2 years from the end of the financial year in which such statement was filed. Accordingly, as stated by the ld. AR, and rightly so, the time limit for passing of an order under sub- section (1) to Section 201 in the case of the assessee before us could have been done latest by 31.03.2014. Rebutting the aforesaid clai .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ded to amend the enacted law with retrospective effect, it had expressly provided for a retrospective operation of the same. In sum and substance, the proceedings which due to bar of limitation had attained finality under the existing law cannot be revived by referring to the enlarged period of limitation made available on the statute vide a subsequent amendment, unless the amended provision is clearly given a retrospective applicability. Our/aforesaid observation is supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of K.M. Sharma vs. ITO, 254 ITR 772 (SC). In its aforesaid order, the Hon'ble Apex Court while dealing with the scope and gamut of the amendment to sub-section (1) of Section 149 of the Act, had observed, that i .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ction (1) to Section 201 to 7 years, therefore, the order to be passed in the case of the assessee was well within limitation. On a writ petition filed by the assessee, the Hon'ble High Court held that as the amended provisions were to apply prospectively, therefore no order u/s. 201(1) of the Act could have been passed, as the limitation for passing of such an order had already expired prior to the amendment that was made available on the statute vide the Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01.10.2014. For the sake of clarity the relevant observations of the Hon'ble High Court are culled out as under: "15. Considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid decisions, to the facts of the case on hand and more particular .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... herein are hereby restrained by writ of prohibition from proceedings with the impugned notices / summonses which are, as such, hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is mad absolute accordingly in each of the petitions. In the facts and circumstances the case, there shall be no order as to costs. " (emphasis supplied)" 10. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations read a/w the settled position of law, we are of the considered view, that as the time limitation for passing an order under sub-section (1) to Section 201 i.e deeming the present assessee before us, as an assessee-in-default under sub-section (1) to Section 201 of the Act could have validly been done within a period of 2 years from the end of the financial year in which the st .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates