2016 (7) TMI 1479

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tax return filed under section 139, therefore, by virtue of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act 2012, disallowance under section 40(a}(ia} could not be invoked. 2. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) also erred in law by ignoring the fact in view of well settled legal  position that the insertion of second proviso to section 4o(a)(ia) was declaratory and curative in nature and it had retrospective effect from 1-4-2005, being the date from which sub-clause (ia) of section 40(a) was inserted by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004. 3. On a "fair, just and equitable" interpretation of law tax withholding lapses by the assesee did not result in any loss to the exchequer, as the payee(M/s Am an Dhaba) had included the sum re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he case of Rajeev Kumar Aggarwal Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income, Matura has held that the amended provisions of section 40(a)(ia) is declaratory and curative in nature and it has retrospective effect form 1.4.2005.   3. The Ld. CIT(A) found that second provision to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has been introduced by Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 1.4.2013, therefore, it is not applicable to the assessment year under appeal. He has also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics & Transports Vs. ITO dated 13.1.2014 in which it was held that insertion of second provisio to section 40(a)(ia) is w.e.f. 1.4.2013. Therefore, said benefit is not available to the assessee. 4. After considering the....