TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 1637
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee in this appeal is the addition made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on account of non deduction of TDS for interest paid to Tata Capital Housing Finance Ltd. 3. The brief facts in this case are that the assessee is a partnership firm and is engaged in the business of construction, developers and builders. The return was filed on 18.09.2012 showing total income of Rs. 25,32,760/-. The assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act was completed arriving assessed total income of Rs. 1,11,46,124/- by making various additions/disallowances as appearing in the assessment order. 4. That with regard to the disallowance made u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act, at the time of hearing, the Ld. AR of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....23/PUN/2016 for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 wherein, the Tribunal was faced with similar kind of facts. There was disallowance of expenditure u/s.40(a)(ia) of the Act since the assessee has not deducted TDS u/s.194A of the Act before making the payment of interest and therefore, the expenditure was disallowed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. However, the assessee's contention was that the amount of interest paid by the assessee have been offered to tax by the respective recipients and as proof of the amount offered by the respective recipient to tax is also certified by their Chartered Accountants and the necessary C.A certificates were also filed by the assessee. 6. The Pune Bench of the Tribunal in ITA N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rther, it was submitted by the Ld. AR of the assessee that as on the present date the relevant judgment on the issue has been delivered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr. CIT-5 Vs. Perfect Circle India Pvt. Ltd. in Income Tax Appeal No.707 of 2016 wherein the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has placed reliance on the view taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd (supra.) and has held that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) is retrospective in nature w.e.f. 01.04.2005 i.e. the date when the main proviso to 40(a)(ia) itself was inserted. This view was taken in consonance to the opinion of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages P L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ospective in nature starting from 01.04.2005 i.e. the date when the main proviso itself was inserted. Earlier the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Prudential Logistics and Transport Vs. Income Tax Officer (supra.) has held that this proviso is prospective in nature. However, we find that thereafter, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P) Ltd (supra.) as well as the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Pr. CIT-5 Vs. Perfect Circle India Pvt. Ltd.(supra.) have taken a view that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act has retrospective effect from 01.04.2005 being the date from which sub-clause (ia) of section 40(a) was inserted by the Finance ( No.2) Act, 2004. Furth....