https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275838 The ITAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal, overturning the lower authorities' decision and deleting the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia). The court held that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) should be applied retrospectively from 1.4.2005, not 2013 as argued by the Ld. CIT(A) and supported by a Kerala High Court decision. The court also emphasized that tax withholding lapses, in this case, did not result in any loss to the exchequer as the payee had disclosed the income and paid taxes, in line with a Delhi High Court judgment. en-us Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Oct 2018 09:55:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275838 The ITAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal, overturning the lower authorities' decision and deleting the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia). The court held that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) should be applied retrospectively from 1.4.2005, not 2013 as argued by the Ld. CIT(A) and supported by a Kerala High Court decision. The court also emphasized that tax withholding lapses, in this case, did not result in any loss to the exchequer as the payee had disclosed the income and paid taxes, in line with a Delhi High Court judgment. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 19 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275838