IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 835/HYD/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, APPELLANT CIRCLE 16(1), HYDERABAD. VS. M/S LIQUIDZ INDIA PVT. LTD., RESPOND ENT HYDERABAD. (PAN AABCL0387K) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.E. SUNIL BABU RESPONDENT BY : SHRI K.C. DEVADAS DATE OF HEARING : 28/08/2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28/08/2013 ORDER PER CHANDRA POOJARI, A.M.: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIREC TED AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A)-V, HYDERABAD DATED 28/0 2/2013, FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS P ERTAINING TO THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS. 65,89,810/- MADE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE IT ACT. 3. IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THERE WAS DELAY IN MAKING PAYMENT OF TAX DEDUCTED A T SOURCE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND, THEREFORE, HE WORKED OUT THE DISALLOWANCE AT RS. 65,89,810/-. 2 ITA NO. 835/HYD/13 M/S LIQUIDZ INDIA PVT. LTD. 4. ON APPEAL, BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE SUBMIT TED THAT IT HAD DEDUCTED TDS AT APPLICABLE RATES AND REMITTED T HE TDS TO EXCHEQUER WELL BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FURNISHING TH E RETURN OF INCOME. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSEE, THE DUE DATE FOR THE SUBJECT ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS 15/11/2007 AND THE LATEST TDS W AS REMITTED ON 24/10/2007 AND THEREFORE, THE CASE OF T HE ASSESSEE WAS COVERED BY THE AMENDED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40 (A)(IA), WHICH HAVE A RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT. HE RELIED ON THE VARIOUS DECISION OF TRIBUNAL, WHICH WERE EXTRACTED BY THE C IT(A) AT PAGE 3 OF HIS ORDER. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSE E, THE CIT()A) FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF HONBLE KOLKATA H IGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. VIRGIN CREATIONS, ITA NO. 302 O F 2011 (GA 3200/2011) DT. 23/11/2011 HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HA D DEDUCTED TAX AT SOURCE AND REMITTED THE SAME WITHIN THE DATE OF FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139(1) AND, THEREFORE, NO DISA LLOWANCE CAN BE MADE U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. HE, THEREFORE, DI RECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. 6. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIALS ON RECORD AS WELL AS GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. AS HELD BY THE DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. RAJINDER KUMAR IN INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 65/2013 DAT ED 1 ST JULY, 2013, THE IMPUGNED AMENDMENT TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) P ERMITS REMITTANCE OF TDS TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT ON OR BEFORE THE DUE DATE OF FILING RETURN OF INCOME U/S. 139(1) OF THE ACT IS RETROSPECTIVE IN NATURE. SAME VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE 3 ITA NO. 835/HYD/13 M/S LIQUIDZ INDIA PVT. LTD. JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. PE C ELECTRICALS PVT. LTD., IN ITA NO. 263 OF 2013 DATED 12.7.2013. THE ASSESSEE IN PRESENT CASE PAID THE TDS TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT BEFORE FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME AND THE SAME IS TO BE ALLOWED AS HELD BY THE ABOVE JUDGEMENTS. ACCORDINGLY, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE U/S 40(A)(IA) O F THE ACT AND, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS HEREBY UPHELD ON THIS COUNT. THIS GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THIS REGARD I S DISMISSED. 8. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 AUGUST, 20 13 UPON CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/- SD/- (SAKTIJIT DEY) JUDICIAL MEMBER (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 28 TH AUGUST, 2013 KV COPY TO:- 1) DCIT, CIRCLE 16(1), ROOM NO. 612, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, BASHEERBAGH, HYDERABAD. 2) M/S LIQUIDZ INDIA PVT. LTD., B-505, SAI TIRUMALA TOWERS, 3-6-290, HYDERGUDA, HYDERABAD. 3) THE CIT (A)-V, HYDERABAD 4) THE CIT-IV, HYDERABAD. 5) THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, I.T.A.T., HYDE RABAD. 4 ITA NO. 835/HYD/13 M/S LIQUIDZ INDIA PVT. LTD.