TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (1) TMI 1170
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r s. 264 dt. 7th Nov., 2003 vide Annex. F and, to direct refund of taxes deposited at source and to further direct the respondents to pay the interest thereon in terms of s. 244A of the Act on the refund amount and, for such other orders. 2. According to the petitioner, he filed the returns of income based on the TDS certificate issued by the employer for the asst. yr. 2000-01. According to him, his employer has deducted the TDS on the alleged value of the perks included in the salary. Though the employer has filed appeals before the appellate authority, the appellate authority by an order dt. 31st July, 2002, gave a finding that the value of the shares allotted under the Employees Stock Option Scheme would not result in any perks t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....inancial year would not apply to the assessment for that year, even if the assessment is actually made after the amendment came into force. As such, the revision is maintainable and the 1st respondent ought to have entertained the revision and pass an order of refund as there was tax deduction at source by the employer towards the shares allotted treating them as perks. Learned counsel has also relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of CIT vs. Infosys Technologies Ltd. (2007) 207 CTR (Kar) 620 : (2007) 293 ITR 146 (Kar) to contend that, stock options were not perks as such, the assessee is not liable to deduct tax on value of shares and the TDS deducted from the salary of the assessee on such perks remitted to the Revenue is ref....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n to s. 143 has been deleted after the first day of the assessment year of 1999-2000 i.e. w.e.f. 1st June, 1999, it does not take away the vested right of revision for that order. The apex Court, however, in the case of CIT vs. Isthmian Steamship Lines (supra) has held that, the amendment would be treated to relate to the assessment year and not the accounting year. As is held by the apex Court, since the very amendment would relate to the assessment year, even the repealing or omission of the Explanation as on 1st June, 1999 unless it is made specific, has to be normally treated that it is to the assessment year. 8. In the case on hand, although the petitioner had filed returns for the asst. yr. 1999-2000, the said assessment was m....