DCIT 24(3), MUMBAI V. NAREDNRA IMPEX, MUMBAI

ITA 3908/MUM/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2252 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-12-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2014
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUMIT KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SIBHASH SHETTY
• Keywords: Retrospective amendment

Judgement Text

IN THE INCO ME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 3908/M/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 2007 ) DCIT 24(3), R.NO.701, C - 11, 7 TH FLOOR, BKC, BANDRA (E), MUMBAI - 51. / VS. NARENDRA IMPEX, 3 VAKIL INDL. ESTATE, VALBHAT ROAD, GOREGAON EAST, MUMBAI - 63. ./ PAN : AACFN0055A ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SUMIT KUMAR, DR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SIBHASH SHETTY / DATE OF HEARING : 26.11.2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02 .12 .2015 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE ON 29.5.2014 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - 34, MUMBAI DATED 29.3.2014 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THIS APPEAL RELATES TO THE RETROSPECTIVE APPLICABILITY OF THE AMENDED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. THIS IS THE CASE, WHERE THE ASSESSEE MADE CERTAIN PAYMENTS AFTER MAKING TDS AND THE SAID TDS WAS REMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE COMPANY IN THE MONTH OF MAY 2006. HOWEVER, THE REVENUE HELD THAT THE PAYMENTS MADE AFTER THE END OF TH E FY BUT BEFORE THE DUE DATE FOR FILING THE RETURN IS NOT ALLOWED. MATTER TRAVELLED TO THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 3. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, AFTER EXAMINING THE ISSUE AND CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE , CIT (A) GRANTED RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE AND HELD THAT THE SAID AMENDED PROVISIONS HAVE A RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION. THEREBY, THE TDS PAYMENTS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND REMITTED TO THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT IN TIME BEFORE THE DUE DATE FOR FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME ARE 2 NOT HIT BY THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED WITH THE ABOVE FINDING OF THE CIT (A), REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 4. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE US, AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED VAR IOUS DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. NARESH KUMAR AND OTHERS [2014] 362 ITR 256; DECISION OF THE ITAT, MUMBAI IN THE CASE OF PIYUSH C. MEHTA VS. ACIT [2012] 52 SOT 27 (MUMBAI) WHICH IS RELEVANT FOR THE PROPOSITION THAT THE AMENDMENT TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT HAS A RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT AND IT HAS TO BE GIVEN FULL PLAY KEEPING IN MIND THE OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION. AT THE SAME TIME, THE PROVISIONS SHOULD BE INTERPRETED LIBERALLY AND EQUITABLY SO THAT THE ASSESS EE SHOULD NOT SUFFER FROM UNINTENDED AND DELETERIOUS CONSEQUENCES BEYOND THE OBJECT AND PURPOSE OF THESE AMENDMENTS. THEREFORE, THE AMENDMENT MADE TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE FINANCE ACT 2010 SHOUL D BE GIVEN RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT VIDE THE JUDGMENT OF THE H ONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF NARESH KUMBAR (SUPRA). CONSIDERING THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE CIT (A) IS FAIR AND REASONABLE AND IT DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENCE. ACCORDINGLY, THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE REV ENUE ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 2 ND DECEMBER, 2015. SD/ - SD/ - ( AMARJIT SINGH ) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; 02 / 12 /2015 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. / GUARD FILE . 3 //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI