TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (2) TMI 1206
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after referred to as 'the Act') dt.7.12.2006 accepting the returned income of Rs. 2,05,08,940. 2.2 The assessee's case was the subject matter of revisionary proceedings by the CIT (Central), Karnataka. The learned CIT vide order under section 263 of the Act dt.31.3.2009 held that the order of assessment passed under section 143(3) of the Act dt.7.12.2006 was both erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue as the assessee had failed to deduct tax at source as per the provisions of section 194C of the Act in the period relevant to Assessment Year 2005-06 in respect of payments made to two persons namely, to Sri G. Shankar of Rs. 2,69,21,500 and to Sri Ramesh Kotian amounting to Rs. 1,54,75,000 towards sub-contract works amounting to Rs. 4,23,96,500 and directed that the entire payments of Rs. 4,23,96,500 be disallowed under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act for non-deduction of tax at source in accordance with the provisions of section 194C of the Act. 2.3 Consequent to the order of the learned CIT dt.31.3.2009 under section 263 of the Act, the Assessing Officer in pursuance of the directions contained therein passed an or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....refore there is no loss to revenue. The learned CIT (Appeals) held that the contentions raised by the assessee, that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act is applicable only to amounts payable as on 31st March of any year is not acceptable since the correct position in law is that section 40(a)(ia) of the Act covers not only amounts which are payable as on 31st March of a particular year but also to those amounts payable at any point in time during the year. The learned CIT (Appeals) in his order while declining to follow the decision of the co-ordinate bench in the case of DCIT V Ananda Markala in ITA No.1584/Bang/2012 and C.O. No.58/Bang/2013 dt.13.9.2013 held that even if one were to accept this decision of the Tribunal(supra), in regard to the retrospective application of the newly inserted second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act w.e.f. 1.4.2005, it is seen that Form No.26A has not been submitted before the Assessing Officer in the case on hand which is a pre-requisite. Therefore, there is no case for allowing the assessee any exemption from the applicability of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 3.1 Aggrieved with the order of the CIT (Appeals), Belgaum dt.29.10.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e learned authorities below failed to appreciate the fact that disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) is permissible only if the deduction is claimed under section 30 to 38 of the IT Act, 1961 under the facts and circumstances of the case. Where the payment ot contractor partakes the payment made under section 28 of the IT Act, 1961. 8. Without prejudice to the right to seek waiver as per the parity of reasoning of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Karanvir Singh 349 ITR 692, the appellant denies itself liable to be charged to interest under section 234B of the IT Act under the facts and circumstances of the case. further the levy of interest under section 234B of the Act is also bad in law as the period, rate, quantum and method of calculation adopted on which interest is levied are all not discernable and are wrong on the facts of the case. 9. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, delete or substitute any of the grounds urged above. 10. In the view of the above and other grounds that maybe urged at the time of the hearing of the appeal, the appellant prays that the appeal may be allowed in the interest of justice and equity." 3.2.1 At the out....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ffered to tax or not. In the case on hand, the learned Authorised Representative submits that the facts on record are that both the payer and two payees are subjected to audit under section 44AB of the Act; all payments have passed through banking channels and further the respective C.A. has certified the respective financial statements and the books of account of the assessee of the aforesaid two payees / recipients which show that the said payments made by the assessee and the said payments received by the two payees has been duly accounted for and have been offered for taxation in the hands of two payees. The learned Authorised Representative submits that the certification of accounts by the C.As in the tax audit report under section 44AB for both the assessee in the case on hand and the case of the two payees is not only in conformity with the provisions of the section but also in accordance with law. The learned Authorised Representative assailed the observations of the learned CIT (Appeals) in stating that the disallowance section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was in order since Form No.26A was not submitted by the assessee before the Assessing Officer, contending that this requiremen....