RENTOKIL INDIA PRIVATE LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that if TDS is paid before the due date of filing the return, the deduction for the expenditure is permissible in the previous year in which the tax was paid to the government account. The Assessing Officer was directed to allow the deduction.
What were the facts?
The assessee paid management fees to its Associate Enterprises and deducted TDS. Although the TDS was deducted in December 2010, it was remitted to the government account on September 24, 2011, which was after the due date of April 30, 2011, but before the due date of filing the return. The assessee claimed deduction for the management fees.
What were the issues?
Whether the deduction for management fees is allowable when TDS was paid after the due date but before the return filing due date. Whether the benefit of deduction can be granted in the year the tax was paid.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Calcutta Export Company93 citing404 ITR 654 · 2018 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘ C’ BENCH : CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY
आदेश / O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3,Chennai in dated 27.10.2017 for the assessment year 2011- 12.
Mr.SP.Chidambaram represented on behalf of the Assessee 2. and Mr.Clement Ramesh Kumar represented on behalf the of the Revenue.
It was submitted by the Ld.AR that the assessee is a company, which is doing the business of providing pest control services to various retail and industrial customers. It was a submission that assessee had paid Management Fees amounting to `1,20,28,952/- to its Associate Enterprises (A.E). It was a submission that assessee had deducted the TDS in respect of the said payment in December,2010, which was liable to be remitted on or before 30th April,2011 in respect of assessment year 2011-12 as per provisions of the section 40(a)(i) of the Act. It was a further submission that however, the assessee had paid the TDS to the account of the Government only on 24.09.2011, which was before the due date of filing of the return. It was a submission that the return has been filed on 28.11.2014. It was a submission that the assessee having paid the TDS before the due date of filing of the return of income u/s.139(1) of the Act, the assessee may be granted benefit of the deduction of the expenses as claimed by the assessee. In the alternative, it was a prayer that a suitable direction may be issued to the ld. Assessing Officer to provide such allowances during the year in which the taxes are paid.
In reply, ld.D.R submitted that the TDS having not been paid within the due date as provided under the Act being 30.04.2011 for assessment year 2011-12, the deduction in respect of management fees cannot be granted to the assessee. Ld.D.R vehemently supported the orders of ld. Assessing Officer and the Ld.CIT(A).
We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the provisions of the section 40(a)(i) of the Act and the proviso thereto, shows that if the amount has been paid by the assessee after deduction of TDS to the account of the Government before the due date of filing of the return, then the amount could be permitted as an expenditure in the previous year in which the amount has been paid to the account of Central Government. This view of ours, find support from the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT Vs. Calcutta Export Company reported in 404 ITR 654 (SC) wherein held that deduction of the amount is permissible in the previous year in which the amount of tax has been deducted and paid to the account of the Central Government. In the circumstances, respectfully following the principles laid down by the Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT Vs.Calcutta Export Company referred to supra, the ld. Assessing Officer is directed to allow the assessee the benefit of the expenditure of Management fees of `1,20,28,952/- in the previous year in which tax deducted in respect of the same has been paid the account of the Central Government.
5.1 We are not adjudicating the grounds in respect of reopening of assessment, as on merits the assessee has got the necessary relief.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
Order pronounced on 08th October, 2018, at Chennai.
More judgments on Section 40(a)(i)
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
- DDIT(It)- 1(1), Mumbai vs M/S. American Express Bank Ltd., MumbaiITA 5667/MUM/2004[2000-01]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-01
- Eurofins Peenya Resources Private Limited… vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 1116/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Azure Green Tech Private Limited, Delhi vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 6199/DEL/2026[2021-22]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Azure Green Tech Private Limited, Delhi vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 6198/DEL/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed21 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rentex Polymers Private Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxDelhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Maa Shila Traders vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S Ashish Enterprises vs. Assistant Commissioner Gsto Ward No. 86Delhi · 29 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bhanwal Trading And Company vs. The Union Of INDIARajasthan · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Saraswati Enterprises vs. State Of RajasthanRajasthan · 28 Oct 2026