2014 (9) TMI 934

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Appeal: 2. In the solitary substantive ground raised in its appeal, the Revenue has challenged the action of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 5,69,07,949 made by the Assessing Officer under S.40(a)(ia) holding that the amendment to the said provision made by the Finance Act, 2010 is applicable for assessment year 2009-10, being retrospective in nature. 3. The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of civil construction/engineering contracts. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 17.11.2009, declaring total income of Rs. 1,04,56,245. From the details given in the audit report annexed to the said return, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....endered in the case of IVRCL Infrastructure & Projects Ltd. (supra), wherein a similar disallowance made under S.40(a)(ia) was held to be unsustainable by the Tribunal following its earlier decision in the case of ADIT V/s. Nippon Jogesuido Sekei Co. Ltd. in ITA No.726/Hyd/2013 dated 6.12.2013, wherein it was held as under-               "We have heard both the parties and perused the materials on record as well as gone through the orders of the authorities below. As held by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajinder Kumar in Income Tax Appeal No. 65/2013 dated 1st July, 2013, the impugned amendment to section 40(a)(ia) permits remittance of TDS to the Central Gov....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Officer and confirmed by the learned CIT(A) by way of disallowance made on account of sales tax liability. 8. In the computation of total income, a sum of Rs. 75,65,048 had been added back by the assessee to the profit declared as per the Profit & Loss Account. During the course of assessment proceedings, a letter dated 5.9.2011 was filed by the assessee stating that the said amount was inclusive of a sum of Rs. 28,36,026 pertaining to works contract tax liability, which had arisen during the year consideration as a consequence of completion of sales tax assessment. The assessee claimed that the said amount should, therefore, be allowed as deduction in the year under consideration, as the liability for works contract tax had arisen in t....