Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2013 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 367 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of Expenditure on TDS u/s 40(a)(ia) - the issue was as to the disallowance of claim of expenditure on the basis that the assessee deducted the tax but not deposited in the Government account within the period as prescribed under the statute and section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act - Held that:- The amendment by Finance Act, 2010 to section 40(a)(ia) cannot be applied to the assessment year in dispute i.e., 2009-10 - Because of difference in judicial opinion, the case was referred to the Special Bench and the Tribunal Special Bench, Mumbai after considering the entire issue in the case of Bharati Shipyard Ltd. vs. DCIT [2011 (9) TMI 258 - ITAT MUMBAI ] - amendment to section 40(a)(ia) made by Finance Act, 2010 was with retrospective effect from 1st April 2010 extending the time limit for depositing of tax deducted at source in the case of one category of cases was neither aimed at removing any unintended hardship to the assessees nor it was curative or declaratory of the provisions of law and, therefore, it cannot be given retrospective effect - the issue raised in the Revenue appeal in was decided in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. Expenditure u/s 40(a)(ia) - Disallowance due to non deduction of TDS - whether the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) applied only to that expenditure which is payable as of 31st March and not to the expenditure which had already been paid during the year itself - Held that:- The order of M/s. Merilyn Shipping & Transports vs. ACIT [2012 (4) TMI 290 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM ] was suspended by the High Court for the time being - Matter remitted back to AO – Decided in favour of Revenue. Difference in TDS as per Form no. 26AS and as claimed in the return - Confirmation of Addition on the Ground Of Price Variation - Held that:- The assessee failed to reconcile the figures mentioned in Form No. 26AS and Profit & Loss Account - The assessee had not been able to file any confirmation from the contractors regarding the price variation claimed - it cannot be denied that as per Form No. 26AS, the assessee had itself shown the gross receipts.
|