THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. M/S OPERATORS COMMUNICATION

PDF · subscribers
ITA/230/2015HC KarnatakaKAHC01031095201518 January 2016Bench: S.SUJATHA,N.K.PATIL3 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal, following a previous common judgment. The court agreed with the ITAT's interpretation of the amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) as remedial and retrospective.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against an ITAT order that confirmed the Appellate Commissioner's decision. The ITAT held that an amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) was retrospective and that TDS could be remitted before the due date of filing the return.

What were the issues?

Whether the amendment to Section 40(a)(ia) by the Finance Act, 2010 was retrospective, and whether TDS could be considered a provision remitted before the due date of filing the return.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(ia),Section 139(1),Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2016

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL

AND

THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

ITA No.230/2015

BETWEEN

1.

The Commissioner of Income-tax

C R Building,

Attavara,

Mangalore-575 001.

2.

The Income-tax Officer

Ward-1(1)

C R Building

Attavara

Mangalore-575 001. …Appellants (By Sri. K.V.Aravind, Advocate)

AND

M/s. Operators Communication Network Pvt. Ltd., 14-1-81, Top Floor Trade Centre, Bunts Hostel Road Mangalore-575 031. ….Respondent

This Appeal is filed under Section 260-A of Income-tax Act, 1961, to set aside the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore in ITA No.128/Bang/2014 dated 22.01.2015 confirming the order of the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by the Income- tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Mangalore.

This Appeal coming on for Admission, this day, N.K. Patil, J., delivered the following:

JUDGMENT

This appeal is by the Revenue, questioning the correctness of the Order dated 22.1.2015 passed in ITA No.128/Bang/2014 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore, confirming the order passed by the Appellate Commissioner and confirm the order passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward– 1[1], Mangalore, to consider the following substantial questions of law. “1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the amendment to provisions of section 40(a)(ia) by the finance Act, 2010 was clearly remedial/curative in nature and retrospectively effective from 01.04.2005?

2.

Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the tax deducted at source could be held as a provision and could be remitted to the government account before the due date of filing of return under section 139(1) by over-seeing the supremacy of legislative implication of section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act?”

2.

We have heard Sri. K.V. Aravind, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants, for some time.

3.

During the course of submission, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that in the light of the common Judgment dated 15.7.2014 passed in ITA No.590/2013 and connected cases in the case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax and Another Vs. Santosh Kumar Shetty’, and for the reasons stated therein, the instant appeal may be dismissed.

4.

Submission of the learned Counsel for the appellants is placed on record.

5.

The instant appeal filed by the appellants is dismissed following the Judgment dated 15.7.2014 passed in ITA No.590/2013 and connected cases [supra], and for the reasons stated therein.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

AN/-

More judgments on Section 40(a)(ia)

All 7,300 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(ia) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →