Court allows re-filed appeal challenging tax deductions for AY 2008-09. Dismissed for lack of legal questions.

The Court condoned the delay in re-filing the appeal and allowed it subject to just exceptions. The appeal challenged the ITAT's orders for AY 2008-09 regarding tax deductions by the Respondent-Assessee. Despite the initial disallowance by the Assessing Officer, the CIT (A) partly allowed the appeal. The ITAT affirmed the CIT (A)'s decision but rectified its order based on a previous appeal. The Court dismissed the appeal, finding no substantial legal questions, and upheld the rectification by the ITAT for AY 2008-09.

---

---

Issues:
1. Delay in re-filing the appeal
2. Challenge to orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) for Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09

Analysis:

Issue 1: Delay in re-filing the appeal
The delay in re-filing the appeal was condoned by the Court based on the reasons stated in the application. The application for delay in re-filing was allowed subject to all just exceptions, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly.

Issue 2: Challenge to orders of the ITAT for AY 2008-09
The challenge in this appeal was against two orders of the ITAT for AY 2008-09. The main question before the ITAT was whether the Respondent-Assessee was liable to deduct tax at source under Section 194H/194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on discounts offered by its collection agents/franchises, and whether disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act would be attracted.

The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, resulting in an addition to the returned income. The Respondent-Assessee appealed before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT (A)), who partly allowed the appeal.

The ITAT noted the issue of disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) and affirmed the CIT (A)'s decision. However, the ITAT failed to consider that in the Assessee's appeal for AY 2006-07, the disallowance had been deleted as the provisions of Section 194H were wrongly invoked.

The ITAT rectified its order based on the Assessee's appeal for AY 2006-07, and the Revenue acknowledged that the rectification should be sustained. The Court found no substantial question of law arising from the ITAT's orders and dismissed the appeal.

In conclusion, the Court upheld the rectification made by the ITAT and dismissed the appeal based on the lack of substantial legal questions arising from the ITAT's orders for AY 2008-09.

---