COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. STANDARD BUILDCON

TAXAP/993/2013

AI Insights

The case involves the Commissioner of Income Tax as the appellant and Standard Buildcon as the respondent. The dispute centered on the addition/disallowance of Rs.30,71,212 by the Assessing Officer, which was contested in the ITAT and subsequently in the Gujarat High Court. The addition was based on the late deposit of TDS by the assessee, which was credited to the government account before the due date of filing the return. The ITAT ruled in favor of the respondent, leading to the present appeal by the Commissioner of Income Tax. The High Court's decision affirmed the ITAT's ruling, referencing the retrospective amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 744380 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2013
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Tax Appeal No. 412/2013 and allied appeals
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: PRANAV DESAI
• Keywords: Addition/disallowance; Assessment Year; Income Tax; Reassessment; TDS
• Section: 147; 143(3); 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

"O/TAXAP/993/2013 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 993 of 2013 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA ====================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================== COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX....Appellant(s) Versus STANDARD BUILDCON....Opponent(s) ====================================== Appearance: MR PRANAV G DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 ====================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA Date : 02/12/2013 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Page 1 of 3 O/TAXAP/993/2013 JUDGMENT Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘ITAT’) dated 06/06/2013 in ITA No. 281/RJT/2012 for the Assessment Year 2006-07, the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following substantial questions of law; (A) “Whether the ITAT is justified in law as well as on fact in deleting the addition/disallowance of Rs.30,71,212/- made by the Assessing Officer applying the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act?” (B) “Whether the ITAT is justified in law as well as on fact in coming to the conclusion that the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Act is not valid?” 2. Having heard Shri Pranav Desai, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the revenue and considering the impugned order passed by the ITAT and the proposed substantial questions of law, the only question, which is raised in the present Tax Appeal, is whether the ITAT is justified in law as well as on fact in deleting the addition/disallowance of Rs.30,71,212/- made by the Assessing Officer applying the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act? 3. Another question, which is raised is the initiation of reassessment order under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 of the Income Tax Act. 4. It is not in dispute that the TDS on various expenditure was deducted by the assessee but an amount of Rs.30,71,212/- was credited to the government account on 06/04/2006. The Assessing Officer made the addition of Page 2 of 3 O/TAXAP/993/2013 JUDGMENT Rs.30,71,212/- in the income of the assessee for the relevant year on the ground that the same was deposited by the assessee after expiry of the prescribed time limit but before the due date of filing of the return i.e. 31/12/2006. While delivering the judgment in Tax Appeal No. 412/2013 and allied appeals, we have held that amendment under Section under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act brought out by Finance Act, 2010 with effect from 01/04/2010 is having retrospective effect and, therefore, if the tax deducted is deposited by the assessee before the due date of filing the return, the same is required to be given credit in the very assessment year. 4.1. In view of the above, no error has been committed by the ITAT in deleting the addition/disallowance of Rs.30,71,212/- made by the Assessing Officer applying the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. 5. In view of the above, as such, question no. (B) i.e. challenge to the reassessment proceedings under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act would be academic. 6. Under the circumstances, no question of law, much less substantial question of law arises in the present Tax Appeal. Hence, the present Tax Appeal deserves tobe dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. (M.R.SHAH, J.) (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) Siji Page 3 of 3 "