2018 (12) TMI 1383

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2-13 on 29.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 5,31,763/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dt.27.03.2015 and the total income was determined at Rs. 49,73,180/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who vide order dt.13.02.2017 (in appeal No. PN/CIT(A)-5/ITO Wd-13(5), Pune/37/2015-16) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal and has raised the following grounds : "Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in making disallowance of Rs. 44,41,419/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of Income Tax Act, 1961, Appellant prays to allow the same. 2. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....: case under consideration does not come in its ambit. It has been held in Gem Granites vs. CIT (SC) 271 ITR 322 that, no retrospectivity unless expressly stated or clearly implied. The Hon'ble Madras High Court has held, in the cases of CIT vs Pooshya Exports (p) Ltd. (Mad) 262 ITR 417, CWT vs. Reliance Motor Co. Ltd (Mad) 260 ITR 571 and CWT vs. BR Theaters & Industrial Concerns (P) Ltd (Mad) 272 ITR 177 that beneficial provision does not necessarily imply, that the amendment is to be given retrospective effect, unless specifically made it as retrospective in operation The Appellant has relied on the decision of the jurisdictional ITAT in the case of M/s. Gaurimal Mahajan & Sons ITA No. 852/PN/2012 dt 06.01.2014 stating that, the Hon&#3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....est received by them from the assessee and therefore no disallowance was called for in view of amendment to Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act r.w.s. proviso Sec.201 inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 01.07.2012. He pointed to the copies of certificates placed at pages 4 and 5 of the Paper Book. He further submitted that Pune Tribunal in series of decisions has held that insertion of second proviso to Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act is declaratory and curative in nature and retrospective w.e.f. 01.04.2013 being the date from which Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act was inserted. He therefore submitted that in such a situation, no disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act is warranted. Ld.D.R. on the other hand, supported the order of AO and Ld.CIT(A). 6. I have he....