TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (9) TMI 850
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r and Developer. The assessment in the case of assessee for A.Y. 2012-13 was initially framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28.03.2015 and the total income was assessed at Rs. 41,680/-. Thereafter, the case was re-opened by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. Thereafter, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act vide order dt.30.12.2016 and the total income was determined at Rs. 41,680/-. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A) who vide order dated 10.09.2018 (in appeal No.PN/CIT(A)- 12/10333/2017-18) granted substantial relief to the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal and has raised the following grounds : "1. On the facts and circumstance....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... from 01.04.2013 i.e., for A.Y. 2013-14 onwards and not applicable to the year under consideration. He accordingly disallowed the interest expenses of Rs. 4,69,57,184/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before Ld.CIT(A), who after relying on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2015) 377 ITR 635 and other decisions cited in his order decided the issue in favour of the assessee by observing as under : "3.1 I have considered the materials placed before me. Brief facts are that the appellant while return of income u./s 139(1) on 30.09.2012 total income of Rs. 41,680/- which was accepted by the AO in the order p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nses only defers the claim of expenses and not giving up of claim of such expenses. The AO also noted that provisions of section 201 for not treating an assessee as assessee in default in case where the receiver of interest had shown the amount of interest received in the return of income filed and paid taxes on it came in effect from 1st April, 2013 which is applicable from AY 2013-14, the assessment year under consideration is AY 2012-13 to which the said proviso of section 201 is not applicable. The AO accordingly disallowed the amount of Rs. 4,69,57,184/- as per the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) and since the appellant added the expenses to the closing WIP, the AO reduced the value of WIP disallowing claim of interest cost included in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the above mentioned judgment categorically held that as regards the rationale behind the insertion of the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act was that the said proviso is declaratory and curative and has retrospective effect from 1st April 2005. Therefore, considering the ratio of this judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court the appellant's case is covered with the amendment came on 01.04.2013 for provisions of section 201 and section 40(a)(ia) considering the appellant being not an assessee in default in case where the expenses debited was included by the receiver in the return of income filed and' tax was paid thereon. Since, the Sun Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. has included the amount of interest income of Rs. 4,69,57....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... issue in the present ground is with respect to disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. It is the case of Revenue that on the interest of Rs. 4,69,57,184/- that was paid by the assessee to M/s. Sun Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., the necessary TDS was not deducted by the assessee and therefore provisions of Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act are applicable. Assessee's case is that the aforesaid interest paid by the assessee has been considered as income by M/s. Sun Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., in its return of income and has also paid taxes on the same and therefore relying on the decision of CIT Vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd., (supra) wherein it has held that insertion of second proviso to Sec.40(a)(ia) of the Act is declaratory and curative in nature....