DCIT Corporate Circle 3(2) , CHENNAI V. Urmilla Enterprises P. Ltd. , CHENNAI

ITA 1651/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5580 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 29-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND
• Keywords: Non-deduction of tax

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !' , $ % BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1651/MDS/2017 ' (' / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(2), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S URMILLA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., 4A, URMILLA HOUSE, NO.15, ARK COLONY, ELDAMS ROAD, ALWARPET, CHENNAI - 600 018. PAN : AAACU 1198 C (*+/ APPELLANT) (,-*+/ RESPONDENT) *+ . / / APPELLANT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT ,-*+ . / / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D. ANAND, ADVOCATE 0 . 1$ / DATE OF HEARING : 14.12.2017 2!( . 1$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.12.2017 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-11, CHENNA I, DATED 20.03.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2 I.T.A. NO.1651/MDS/17 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS WITH REGARD TO DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SE CTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') FO R NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX. 3. SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE PROVISO INTRODUCED WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.20 13 TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT, HELD THAT WHEN THE RECIPIENT OF THE AMOUNT HAS PAID THE TAXES, THERE CANNOT BE ANY DISALLOWANCE. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., THE CIT(APPEALS), IN FACT, PLACED HIS REL IANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF DELHI HIGH COURT IN CIT V. ANSAL LAND M ARK TOWNSHIP PVT. LTD. (377 ITR 635). ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R. , AN SLP WAS FILED BEFORE THE APEX COURT, THEREFORE, THE CIT(APPEALS) IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN PLACING RELIANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF DELHI HIGH COUR T. 4. WE HEARD SHRI D. ANAND, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE ALSO. THE PARLIAMENT IN THEIR WISDOM INTRODUCED PR OVISO TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT WITH EFFECT FROM 01.04.2013 CL ARIFYING THAT IF THE RECIPIENT OF THE AMOUNT HAS PAID TAXES, THERE CANNO T BE ANY DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. T HE DELHI HIGH COURT IN ANSAL LAND MARK TOWNSHIP PVT. LTD. (SUPRA) FOUND THAT THIS 3 I.T.A. NO.1651/MDS/17 PROVISO IS CLARIFACTORY NATURE, THEREFORE, APPLIED RETROSPECTIVELY. IN VIEW OF THIS JUDGMENT OF DELHI HIGH COURT, THIS TRI BUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS RIGHTL Y ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO VERIFY WHETHER THE RECIPIENT HAS ALREADY PAID TAXES OR NOT . ON VERIFICATION, IF THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE RECIPIENT H AS PAID TAXES, THEN THERE SHOULD NOT BE ANY DISALLOWANCE IN THE HANDS O F THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SA ME IS CONFIRMED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 28 TH DECEMBER, 2017 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !' ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 28 TH DECEMBER, 2017. KRI. . ,156 76(1 /COPY TO: 1. *+ /APPELLANT 2. ,-*+ /RESPONDENT 3. 0 81 () /CIT(A)-11, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-3, CHENNAI 5. 69 ,1 /DR 6. :' ; /GF.