Thomas George Muthoot v. CIT

63 Taxmann.com 99High Court2015#2683 most cited

What is Thomas George Muthoot v. CIT authority for?

The second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, applies prospectively and does not have retrospective effect.

44

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Thomas George Muthoot v. CIT · section 40(a)(ia) second proviso · Finance Act 2012 · prospective application · retrospective effect · disallowance for non-deduction of TDS · Kerala High Court · 287 CTR 101

Also reported as

287 CTR 101235 Taxmann 246

Sections most often in play

Section 194CSection 195Section 40(a)(ia)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 197Section 197ASection 43B
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 44ab(a)section 194a(1)section 195(2)section 197interest on securitiessection 194asection 194cassessee in defaultsection 201(1)section 195section 40(a)section 40(a)(ia)

Judgments citing Thomas George Muthoot v. CIT

Mr.Thomas Daniel, Pathanamthitta vs. The ITO, Ward-4, Thiruvalla

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 68/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Nov 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm I.T.A. No.68/Coch/2018 Assessment Year : 2014-15

Section 194ASection 40Section 44A

…c. 40(a)(ia) of the Act and its conclusion that the said proviso is declaratory and curative and has retrospective effect from 1st April, 2005, merits acceptance. She also relied on the decision of the Kerala High Court in the case of Thomas George Muthoot (287 CTR 101). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. On an earlier occasion, a similar issue came up for consideration before this Tribunal in the case of Thomas George Muthoot vs. ACIT (57 SOT 270) (Cochin); 41 CCH 633 wherein the Tribunal held as under: “4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and also perused…

C.R.Rajan, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 6(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1457/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1456 & 1457/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, बी / एस एम सी "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ SMC BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1456 & 1457/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri C.R. Rajan, The Income Tax Officer, No.35/3, Willa Bali, v. Non Corporate Ward 6(1), Porur, A1, Pothepad Road, BSNL Tower-I, Chennai - 600 034. No.16, Greams Road, Chennai - 600 006. PAN : AEOPR 3000 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri B. Sag…

C.R.Rajan, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 6(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1456/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesanआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1456 & 1457/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B. Sagadevan, JCIT
Section 40

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, बी / एस एम सी "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ SMC BENCH, CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1456 & 1457/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri C.R. Rajan, The Income Tax Officer, No.35/3, Willa Bali, v. Non Corporate Ward 6(1), Porur, A1, Pothepad Road, BSNL Tower-I, Chennai - 600 034. No.16, Greams Road, Chennai - 600 006. PAN : AEOPR 3000 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant by : None ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri B. Sag…

The DCIT, Cen Circle, Tvm, Trivandrum vs. M/S.Kk Rocks & Granites India P. Ltd, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 50/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: FixedITAT Cochin24 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. T.M.Sreedharan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

…nt. 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the Revenue has come up in appeals before the Tribunal. The Departmental Representative strongly relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thomas George Muthoot & Ors. [(2016) 287 CTR 101 (Ker.)] wherein the Court has held that once it is found that there was a failure to deduct tax at source, the fact that the recipient has subsequently paid the tax, would not absolve the payee from the consequence of disallowance. On the other hand, the learned AR submitted that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted with effect fr…

The DCIT, Cen Circle, Tvm, Trivandrum vs. M/S.Kk Rocks & Granites India P. Ltd, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 49/COCH/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. T.M.Sreedharan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

…nt. 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the Revenue has come up in appeals before the Tribunal. The Departmental Representative strongly relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thomas George Muthoot & Ors. [(2016) 287 CTR 101 (Ker.)] wherein the Court has held that once it is found that there was a failure to deduct tax at source, the fact that the recipient has subsequently paid the tax, would not absolve the payee from the consequence of disallowance. On the other hand, the learned AR submitted that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted with effect fr…

The DCIT, Cen Circle, Tvm, Trivandrum vs. M/S.Kk Rocks & Granites India P. Ltd, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 48/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. T.M.Sreedharan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

…nt. 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the Revenue has come up in appeals before the Tribunal. The Departmental Representative strongly relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thomas George Muthoot & Ors. [(2016) 287 CTR 101 (Ker.)] wherein the Court has held that once it is found that there was a failure to deduct tax at source, the fact that the recipient has subsequently paid the tax, would not absolve the payee from the consequence of disallowance. On the other hand, the learned AR submitted that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted with effect fr…

The DCIT, Cen Circle, Tvm, Trivandrum vs. M/S.Kk Rocks & Granites India P. Ltd, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 47/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. T.M.Sreedharan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

…nt. 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the Revenue has come up in appeals before the Tribunal. The Departmental Representative strongly relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thomas George Muthoot & Ors. [(2016) 287 CTR 101 (Ker.)] wherein the Court has held that once it is found that there was a failure to deduct tax at source, the fact that the recipient has subsequently paid the tax, would not absolve the payee from the consequence of disallowance. On the other hand, the learned AR submitted that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted with effect fr…

The DCIT, Cen Circle, Tvm, Trivandrum vs. M/S.Kk Rocks & Granites India P. Ltd, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 46/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. T.M.Sreedharan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Santham Bose, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 40

…nt. 4. Aggrieved by the orders of the CIT(A), the Revenue has come up in appeals before the Tribunal. The Departmental Representative strongly relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Thomas George Muthoot & Ors. [(2016) 287 CTR 101 (Ker.)] wherein the Court has held that once it is found that there was a failure to deduct tax at source, the fact that the recipient has subsequently paid the tax, would not absolve the payee from the consequence of disallowance. On the other hand, the learned AR submitted that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) was inserted with effect fr…

Rbl Bank Ltd., Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 650/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.650/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Garg
Section 194Section 194ASection 194A(3)(iii)Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण बी बी” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । बी "यायपीठ पुणे म" । "यायपीठ पुणे म" । "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE "ी डी डी डी. क"णाकरा राव डी लेखा सद"य, एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी, "याियक सद"य के सम" "ी "ी "ी क"णाकरा राव क"णाकरा राव,लेखा सद"य क"णाकरा राव लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी "याियक सद"य के सम" "याियक सद"य के सम" "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.650/PUN/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िन…

Shreekishan Joshi, Mumbai vs. JCIT 24(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1259/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Shreekishan Joshi Dcit 30(2) C-13/5Th 922/923, 9Th Floor Floor Bandra Kurla Vs. Corporate Avenue Complex Mumbai- Sonawala Road, Goregaon 400051. (E) Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aabpj7710M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Aarju Garodia, Dr Date Of Hearing : 03/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 11/07/2018

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Aarju Garodia, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 40Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “J” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Shreekishan Joshi DCIT 30(2) C-13/5th 922/923, 9th floor Floor Bandra Kurla Vs. Corporate Avenue Complex Mumbai- Sonawala Road, Goregaon 400051. (E) Mumbai-400063. PAN No. AABPJ7710M Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Aarju Garodia, DR Date of Hearing : 03/07/2018 Date of pronouncement : 11/07/2018 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2011-12. The app…

Asst CIT 9(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Citygold Investments P.Ld, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4160/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Bleasst. Cit – 9(2)(2) V. M/S. City Gold Investments P. Ltd., R.No. 665A, 6Th Floor, Akruti Trade Centre, Road No. 7, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marol, Midc, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 093

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Ms S. Padmaja
Section 139Section 3Section 40

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Asst. CIT – 9(2)(2) v. M/s. City Gold Investments P. Ltd., R.No. 665A, 6th Floor, Akruti Trade Centre, Road No. 7, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marol, MIDC, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai – 400 093 PAN NO: AACCC 7365 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Vijay Mehta Department by : Ms S. Padmaja Date of Hearing : 17.04.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 27.06.2018 O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the ord…

The Ratnakar Bank Ltd., Kolhapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 502/PUN/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma
Section 194ASection 40

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण “ए” न्यायऩीठ ऩुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE श्री डी. करुणाकरा राव, ऱेखा सदस्य, एवं श्री ववकास अवस्थी, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / ITA No.501/PUN/2015 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 RBL Bank Limited, (Formerly : The Ratnakar Bank Limited), Shree Shahu Market Yard, Kolhapur – 416001 PAN : AABCT3335M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 2, Kolhapur ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / ITA No.502/PUN/2015 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment…

The Ratnakar Bank Ltd., Kolhapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee for assessment year 2010-11 is partly allowed in the terms aforesaid

ITA 501/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Aseem Sharma
Section 194ASection 40

…आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण “ए” न्यायऩीठ ऩुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE श्री डी. करुणाकरा राव, ऱेखा सदस्य, एवं श्री ववकास अवस्थी, न्याययक सदस्य के समक्ष । BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / ITA No.501/PUN/2015 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 RBL Bank Limited, (Formerly : The Ratnakar Bank Limited), Shree Shahu Market Yard, Kolhapur – 416001 PAN : AABCT3335M .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/s. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle – 2, Kolhapur ……प्रत्यथी / Respondent आयकर अऩीऱ सं. / ITA No.502/PUN/2015 यनधाारण वषा / Assessment…

Wakil Ahmed, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-25, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 499/KOL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Dec 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Kalyan Nath, Addl.CIT, ld.DR
Section 139Section 194Section 194CSection 194ISection 201Section 201(1)Section 40

…ng reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Ansal Land Mark Township(P) Ltd supra. But, however, the CIT-A preferred to follow the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Thomas George Moothoot reported in 63 Taxmann.com 99 and held that the amendment to Finance Act 2012 in respect of section 40(a)(ia) is effective from 01-04-2013, but not from retrospective effect. The ld.AR argued by placing reliance on the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. M/s. Tirupati Construction to restore the matter to the file of AO to make necessar…

Anamika Conductors Ltd., Jaipur vs. Add. CIT, Jaipur

In the result, the ground taken by the assessee is allowed

ITA 266/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Oct 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. R. A. Verma (Addl.CIT)
Section 40Section 80I

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 266/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11 cuke M/s Anamika Conductors Ltd., The ACIT, Vs. B-129 Rajendra Marg, Bapu Nagar, Range-6, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCA5681P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri G.M. Mehta (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. R. A. Verma (Addl.…

Sneh Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 698/JPR/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Oct 2017AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (JCIT)
Section 133ASection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh HkkxpUn] ys[kk lnL; ,oa Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 698/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10. cuke Smt. Sneh Gupta, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. E-46, Road No. 1B, Ward 4(2), VKI Area, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. ACIPG 4373 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri P.P. Meena (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh…

Upl Environmental Engineers Ltd., Baroda vs. The ACIT., Range-4, Baroda

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2191/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Aug 2017AY 2010-11
Section 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)

…ITA No. 2191/Ahd/2014 UPL Environmental Engineers Ltd vs. ACIT Assessment Year : 2010-11 Page 1 of 8 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and S S Godara JM] Assessment Year: 2010-11 UPL Environmental Engineers Ltd .......…………......Appellant Block No.1, Near Banco Products Ltd., Village : Bhayali, Dist: Baroda-391 410 [PAN : AADCA 4427 H] Vs. ACIT .......................Respondent Range-4, Baroda Appearances by: SN Soparkar for the appellant Albinus Tirkey for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : September 14, 2017 Date of pronouncing the o…

Jay Mataji Construction, Gandhinagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

ITA 3111/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 May 2017AY 2006-07
Section 40

…ITA No.3111/Ahd/2014 Assessment Year: 2006-07 Page 1 of 5 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD C BENCH, AHMEDBAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar AM and S.S. Godara JM] Assessment Year: 2006-07 Jay Mataji Construction, ....…..….….....Appellant Plot No.1515/1, Sector-3D, Gandhinagar – 382 003. [PAN: AAFFJ 2793 Q] Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -2, Gandhinagar. ....................Respondent Appearances by: None for the appellant James Kurian for the respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 23.05.2017 Date of pronouncing the order : 24.05.2017 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar AM: This appeal is directed against the or…

Asphalt India Corporation, Mumbai vs. DCIT 20(1), Mumbai

ITA 1869/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./1869/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Asphalt India Corporation Dcit, 20(1) 1-B, Vimal Apartments, Juhu Lane R.No.404, 4Th Floor, Piramal Chambers Vs. Andheri (W),Mumbai-400 058. Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012. Pan:Aaafa 3614 L (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By: Shri B.C.S Naik-Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Assessee By: Shri Vijay Mehta & Dharmesh Shah-Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 27/04/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 24 /05/2017 लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 30.01.2014 Of Cit (Appeals)-31, Mumbai, The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee,-Firm Filed Its Return Of Income On 03.03.2007,Declaring Total Income At Rs.24.29 Lakhs. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Completed The Assessment On 26. 12.2007 At Rs.8.68 Crores. He Made Disallowance 40(A)(Ia) On Account Of Late Payment Of Tds(Rs.7.86 Crores),Interest Suspense Account (Rs.15.91 Lakhs) & Sundry Creditors (Rs.41.84 Lakhs).The First Appellate Authority (Faa ) Confirmed The Additions Made By The Ao. The Tribunal Vide Its Order Dated 04.05.2012 Restored Back The Issue To The File Of The Ao (Ita/3922/Mum/2009).

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta & Dharmesh Shah-ARFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S Naik-CIT-DR
Section 40

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “ऐ” खंडपीठ मुंबई खंडपीठ खंडपीठ मेमेमेमे खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“A”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अमरजीत "सह, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./1869/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2006-07 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/s. Asphalt India Corporation DCIT, 20(1) 1-B, Vimal Apartments, Juhu Lane R.No.404, 4th Floor, Piramal Chambers Vs. Andheri (W),Mumbai-400 058. Lalbaug, Parel, Mumbai-400 012. PAN:AAAFA 3614 L (…

Morani Fourwheels Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur

In the result, ground taken by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 175/JPR/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 May 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri S. L. Poddar (Ad.)For Respondent: Shri O.P. Bhateja (Addl.CIT)
Section 194CSection 40Section 40A(3)

…re the lower Authorities which were not considered by the lower authorities by holding that the said amendment is prospective in nature. 4.2. The ld. DR drawn our reference to the decision of Hon’ble Kerala High Court in case of Thomas George Muthoot V. CIT (63 Taxmann.com 99) wherein it has been held that the second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) introduced w.e.f. 01.04.13 is prospective in nature. 4.3 The second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) reads as under:- “Provided further that where an assessee fails to deduct the whole or any part of the tax in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XVIIB on any such sum…