1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal Upholds Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia)</h1> The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Ld. CIT(A)'s decision regarding the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act. ... Whether Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XV, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act? - Held NO Issues:1. Disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.2. Interpretation of the law regarding TDS deposit and deduction.Analysis:1. The appeal was against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the disallowance of &8377; 14,33,823/- under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The assessing officer disallowed the amount on account of late deposit/non-deduction of tax at source. The Ld. Commissioner partly allowed the appeal after considering the submissions of the assessee.2. The Revenue contended that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law by deleting the disallowance and should have upheld the assessing officer's order. On the other hand, the assessee's representative argued that similar issues had been decided by different benches of the Tribunal following the decision of the Calcutta High Court in CIT Vs. Virgin Creations GA No. 3200/2011.3. The Tribunal examined the submissions and noted that the TDS had been deposited in the government account for most cases before filing the return. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the disallowance only for cases where TDS was not made, such as in the instances of Arvindbhai Himatbhai and Rajput Umedbhai Gamsingh. The Tribunal found that the Ld. D.R. did not contest this finding.4. The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Kolkata-XI Vs. Virgin Creations and subsequent Tribunal decisions in similar cases. Following the precedent set in these cases, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) regarding the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia).5. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the Revenue, affirming the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) regarding the disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act.