https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258293 Section 40(a)(ia) was treated as a curative amendment operating retrospectively, so expenditure could not be disallowed where tax was deducted from contract payments and remitted to the Government before the due date for filing the return under section 139(1). The Tribunal followed decisions holding that the extended payment window was intended to remove hardship and apply to earlier years as well. On that basis, once the tax deduction and remittance requirements were satisfied before the return-filing deadline, the statutory disallowance did not survive and the assessee obtained relief. en-us Fri, 20 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Apr 2015 11:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258293 Section 40(a)(ia) was treated as a curative amendment operating retrospectively, so expenditure could not be disallowed where tax was deducted from contract payments and remitted to the Government before the due date for filing the return under section 139(1). The Tribunal followed decisions holding that the extended payment window was intended to remove hardship and apply to earlier years as well. On that basis, once the tax deduction and remittance requirements were satisfied before the return-filing deadline, the statutory disallowance did not survive and the assessee obtained relief. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 20 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258293