THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XI,KOLKATA vs. M/S CLASSIC CREATION
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court disposed of the appeal on the ground of low tax effect, as the tax involved was below the threshold limit. The substantial questions of law were left open.
What were the facts?
The revenue appealed against an ITAT order allowing expenditure on air freight charges. The primary issue was the applicability of Section 40(a)(ia) for non-deduction of TDS under Section 194C.
What were the issues?
Whether Section 40(a)(ia) applies to air freight charges when TDS under Section 194C was not deducted. Whether Section 40(a)(ia) applies only to payable amounts as of March 31st.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
OD-4 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION [INCOME TAX] ORIGINAL SIDE
ITA/66/2013 THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA-XI, KOLKATA VS M/S CLASSIC CREATION
BEFORE : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S SIVAGNANAM -A N D- HON'BLE JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS) DATE : 28th July, 2025. Appearance : Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, Adv. …for appellant.
The Court : - This appeal has been filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenging the order dated 12.7.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in ITA No./358/Kol/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : “I. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erroneous in allowing the expenditure incurred by the respondent on account of Air Freight Charges by invoking the provision of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as the assessee had not deducted tax under Section 194C of the said Act. II. Whether the provision of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 are applicable only to the amount of expenditure which are payable as on 31st March every year, not on the expenditure which has been actually paid during the previous year without deducting the TDS under Section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961.”
We have heard Mr. Prithu Dudhoria, learned advocate for the appellant.
2 As could be seen from the assessment order dated 3.12.2010 passed under Section 143(3) of the Act, the total tax involved in the instant appeal is Rs.9,72,639/-. If that be so, the revenue cannot pursue this matter any further as the tax effect is far below the threshold limit fixed by the circular issued by the Central Board. Accordingly, the appeal stands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect. The questions of law suggested by the revenue are left open.
(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, CJ.)
(CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.)
SM/pkd. AR(CR)
More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)
- Rekha Agarwal, Jaipur vs ITO WD 4(1), JaipurITA 844/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2021-22
- Cdg Petchem Limited, Hyderabad vs ITO, Ward - 1(1), HyderabadITA 1900/HYD/2025[2018-2019]Status: Disposed16 Oct 2026AY 2018-2019
- M/S. Shree Laminators Ltd., Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(4), KolkataITA 1534/KOL/2026[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2011-2012
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1493/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- J.D. Marketing, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 37(1), KolkataITA 1492/KOL/2026[2013-2014]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2013-2014
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Commissioner/Additional Commissioner Of Central Tax vs. M/S INDIA Agro Exports Private LimitedKarnataka · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026