Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>ITAT upholds CIT(A) decision to delete disallowance under sec 40(a)(ia) due to timely TDS payment</h1> The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of Rs. 12,39,11,827 under section 40(a)(ia) as the TDS was paid before the return filing ... TDS U/S 194C not made within the due date - Disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) - CIT(A) deleted the disallowance - Held that:- CIT(A) has committed no error in deleting the disallowance by following the decision of IT AT Mumbai in the case of Piyush C. Mehta(2012 (4) TMI 349 - ITAT MUMBAI ) in which it has followed the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Virgin Creation (2011 (11) TMI 348 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT ) to held Amendment to the provisions of Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act, by the Finance Act, 2010 is retrospective from 1.4.2005. - If tax was deductible and was so deducted during the first eleven months of the previous year, that is, up to February, 2005, the disallowance was to be made if the assessee failed to pay it before 31st March, 2005 - provisions of Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act, by the Finance Act, 2010 is retrospective from 1.4.2005 - assessee had deposited the tax deducted at source on or before the due date for filing return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act and therefore the impugned disallowance deserves to be deleted - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues Involved:1. Deletion of disallowance of Rs. 12,39,11,827 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.2. Applicability of the amendment to section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2010.3. Jurisdictional and hierarchical adherence to judicial decisions.Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:1. Deletion of Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia):The Revenue appealed against the order of the CIT(A) which deleted the disallowance of Rs. 12,39,11,827 made under section 40(a)(ia) on the grounds that TDS payments under section 194C were not made within the due date. The CIT(A) found that the TDS on the disallowed amount was deducted and paid on 26/09/2009, before the due date for filing the return. The CIT(A) granted relief to the assessee by following the ITAT Mumbai decision in the case of Piyush C. Mehta, which held that the amendment by the Finance Act, 2010 was retrospective. The Revenue contended that the amendment was applicable only from 01/04/2010 and should not apply to the assessment year 2009-10.2. Applicability of the Amendment to Section 40(a)(ia):The Revenue argued that the amendment to section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2010, which allows for payment of TDS up to the due date of filing the return, was applicable only from 01/04/2010 and not for earlier assessment years. The CIT(A) and the ITAT, however, relied on the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Virgin Creations, which held that the amendment was retrospective and applied from 1.4.2005. The ITAT further supported its decision by referencing the Karnataka High Court ruling in CIT vs. Santosh Kumar Shetty, which also held that the amendment was curative and retrospective in operation.3. Jurisdictional and Hierarchical Adherence to Judicial Decisions:The ITAT emphasized the principle of hierarchical judicial system, where lower courts and tribunals are expected to follow the decisions of higher courts. The ITAT Mumbai in Piyush C. Mehta had followed the Calcutta High Court's decision in Virgin Creations, which was deemed to have higher judicial authority over the Special Bench decision in Bharati Shipyard Ltd. The ITAT reiterated that the amendment to section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2010, being curative in nature, should be applied retrospectively, thus supporting the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance.Conclusion:The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s order, confirming that the disallowance of Rs. 12,39,11,827 under section 40(a)(ia) was rightly deleted since the TDS was paid before the due date for filing the return. The amendment to section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2010 was deemed retrospective, applying from 1.4.2005, thereby covering the assessment year 2009-10. The ITAT dismissed the Revenue's appeal, reinforcing the adherence to higher judicial decisions and the retrospective application of curative amendments.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found