ITO 18(2)(4), MUMBAI V. REFORM CREATIONS, MUMBAI

ITA 6884/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 75662 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 13-02-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B P K

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 6884/MUM/2011 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 ITO 18(2)(4) ROOM NO. 109, PIRAMAL CHAMBERS LALBAUG PAREL MUMBAI-. 400 012 VS. M/S. REFORM CREATIONS 1/7, KRISHNA KRUPA GOKHALE ROAD (NORTH) DADAR WEST, MUMBAI.400 028 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PERMANENT ACCOUNT NO. :- AAIFR 8186 N ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI B.P.K. PANDA DATE OF HEARING : 13.02.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.02.2014 O R D E R PER DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A)-29, MUMBAI DATED 08.08.2011 FOR THE ASSES SMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE REVENUE HAS AGITATED THE ACT ION OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN DELETING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.64,59,515/- MADE BY THE AO UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. NO ONE HAS APPEARED ON BEHAL F OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE THE NOTICE HAVING BEEN SENT TO THE ASSESSEE WELL IN ADV ANCE. WE, THEREFORE, PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE EX PARTE AFTER CON SIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD.DR AND ALSO PERUSING THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, IN THE ASSESSMENT FRAMED, THE AO NOTICED THAT ON LABOUR PAYMENTS AMOUNTING TO RS.64,59,515/-, TDS OF RS.1,4 4,824/- HAD BEEN DEDUCTED BUT WAS PAID ONLY IN THE MONTH OF JUNE 2008. AS THE ASSESSEE DID NOT COMPLY WITH ITA NO. 6884/MUM/2011 M/S. REFORM CREATIONS ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 2 THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) DUE TO LATE PAY MENT OF TDS, THE AO DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE PAYMENTS ARE COVERED BY THE AMENDME NT TO SECTION 40(A)(IA). AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A), T HE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. AT THE OUTSET, IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT I T IS NOT DISPUTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS PAID THE TDS ON 29.05.2008 WHICH IS BE FORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN. IN THIS CONNECTION, IT IS RELEVANT TO STATE THAT THE AMENDMENT MADE IN THE PROVISION OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) VIDE FINANCE ACT 200 8 PROVIDES THAT W.E.F. A.Y. 2005- 06, IN CASE OF EXPENSES ON WHICH TAX DEDUCTIBLE AT SOURCE IS DEDUCTED, THE EXPENDITURE WOULD BE ALLOWABLE IF TAX HAS BEEN PAID BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING OF RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT. SINCE, THE LD.CIT(A) HAS CORRECTLY RELIED ON THE SAID PROVISION FOR ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF THE AS SESSEE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE SAID DECIS ION AND THUS THE SAME IS UPHELD. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 21 ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014. SD/- SD/- (SANJAY ARORA) (DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 21.02.2014. *SRIVASTAVA COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR D BENCH //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.