Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
Assessee company failed to deduct tax at source as reflected in Tax Auditor's report. Demand u/s 201(1)/201(14) was barred by limitation. Assessee submitted that Assessing Officer's order was time-barred. Scope of amendment to Section 201(3) was examined. For deductors filing TDS statement, limitation period of two years remained unchanged. For non-filing, it was extended from four to six years. Subsequently, uniform limitation of seven years was introduced prospectively from October 1, 2014. In the present case, for FY 2010-11, where statement was filed on May 13, 2011, the time limit for passing order u/s 201(1) was March 31, 2014. However, the Assessing Officer passed the order on March 28, 2018, beyond the prescribed time limit. Hence, the Appellate Tribunal rightly allowed the appeal, dismissing the revenue's appeal as the assessment was time-barred.
Assessee company failed to deduct tax at source as reflected in Tax Auditor's report. Demand u/s 201(1)/201(14) was barred by limitation. Assessee submitted that Assessing Officer's order was time-barred. Scope of amendment to Section 201(3) was examined. For deductors filing TDS statement, limitation period of two years remained unchanged. For non-filing, it was extended from four to six years. Subsequently, uniform limitation of seven years was introduced prospectively from October 1, 2014. In the present case, for FY 2010-11, where statement was filed on May 13, 2011, the time limit for passing order u/s 201(1) was March 31, 2014. However, the Assessing Officer passed the order on March 28, 2018, beyond the prescribed time limit. Hence, the Appellate Tribunal rightly allowed the appeal, dismissing the revenue's appeal as the assessment was time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
