Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vadodara-3 v. Shree Pramukh Transport Co
[Citation -2017-LL-0418-8]
| Citation | 2017-LL-0418-8 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vadodara-3 |
| Respondent Name | Shree Pramukh Transport Co. |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 18/04/2017 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | question of law • oral order • non deduction of tds • retrospective amendment • retrospective applicability |
| Bot Summary: | Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgement and order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 12/9/2016 passed in ITA No.404/Ahd/2013 for A.Y. 2005-06, by which the learned tribunal has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the revenue and confirmed the order passed by the learned CIT(A) deleting disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following proposed question of law :-. 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act thereby overriding Board s Circular No.1/2011 F.No. 142/1/2011-SO(TPL), dated 6/4/2011, wherein it has been clarified that the said amendment to section 40(a)(ia) of the IT Act would be applicable to assessment year 10-11 and subsequent years 2.00. Having Heard the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the revenue we are of the opinion that the issue involved in the present appeal is squarely covered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee in light of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad Versus Omprakash R. Chaudhary, rendered in Tax Appeal No.412 of 2013 and other allied Tax Appeals, by which the view has been taken that the amendment made in section 40(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Finance Act 2010 is retrospective in operation and having effect from 1st April 2005 i.e. from the date of insertion of Section 40(ia) of the Act. In view of the above, no error has been committed by the learned tribunal in deleting the disallowance made by the A.O. of Rs.70,53,395/- made u/s. Under the circumstances, no substantial question of law arise in the present appeal and hence the present appeal deserves to be dismissed. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present petition stands dismissed. |