TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (6) TMI 854
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Year 2006-07 vide his order dated 18.12.2009. 2. The sole issue in this appeal of assessee is against the order of CIT(A) confirming the action of AO in disallowing a sum of Rs. 52,43,154/- by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the act for non-deduction of TDS. For this, assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1(a) That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred both on facts and in law in confirming the action of the AO in disallowing a sum of Rs. 52,43,154/- by invoking the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the 'Act'). 1(b) that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that tax relating to the amo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the month of March but paid the same on 24.04.2006. According to assessee's letter, the AO was requested to consider the allowance of this deduction of Rs. 52,43,154/- on which TDS was deducted and deposited out of the total disallowance of Rs. 1,65,06,448/- offered by the assessee. However, the AO while completing assessment vide order dated 18.12.2009 u/s. 143(3) of the act rejected the representation of the assessee and not allowed the above expenses as deduction amounting to Rs. 52,43,154/- on which assessee has deducted the tax during the month of March, 2006 and deposited on 24.04.2006. Aggrieved against the action of AO, assessee preferred appeal before CIT(A), who also confirmed the action of AO that even in the revised return ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as to why the claim for deduction u/s. 40(a)(ia) was not made by filing revised return for the AY 2006-07. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra) is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme court in Goetze (India) Ltd., I hold that the claim of the appellant for deduction of Rs. 52,43,154/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) without filing a revised return cannot be allowed at this stage. In view of it, this ground of appeal is dismissed." Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us. 4. First of all it is to be seen that the assessee offered the entire amount of Rs. 1,65,06,448/- incurred on account of expenditure claimed as deduction, withou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed for which the present appeal is sought to be admitted. It is argued by Mr. Nizamuddin that this court needs to take decision as to whether section 40(a)(ia) is having retrospective operation or not. The learned Tribunal on fact found that the assessee had deducted tax at source from the paid charges between the period April 1, 2005 and April 28, 2006 and the same were paid by the assessee in July and August 2006, i.e. well before the due date of filing of the return of income for the year under consideration. This factual position was undisputed. Moreover, the Supreme Court, as has been recorded by the learned Tribunal, in the case of Allied Motors Pvt. Ltd. and also in the case of Alom Extusions Ltd., has already decided that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uestion raised in this appeal relates to whether the appellant assessee could make a claim for deduction other than by filing a revised return. The assessment year in question was 1995-96. The return was filed on 30-11-1995, by the appellant for the assessment year in question. On 12-1-1998, the appellant sought to claim a deduction by way of a letter before the assessing officer. The deduction was disallowed by the assessing officer on the ground that there was no provision under the Income Tax Act to make amendment in the return of income by modifying an application at the assessment stage without revising the return. 3. The question raised in this appeal relates to whether the appellant assessee could make a claim for deduction other ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....83, to contend that it was open to the assessee to raise the points of law even before the Appellate Tribunal. 6. The decision in question is that the power of the Tribunal under section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is to entertain for the first time a point of law provided the fact on the basis of which the issue of law can be raised before the Tribunal. The decision does not in any way relate to the power of the assessing officer to entertain a claim for deduction otherwise than by filing a revised return. In the circumstances of the case, we dismiss the civil appeal. However, we make it clear that the issue in this case is limited to the power of the assessing authority and does not impinge on the power of the Income Tax Appellate....