Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

08.03.2016 of Ld. CIT(A). Under second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act, there are statutory provisions to the effect that where an assessee fails to deduct the whole or any part of the tax in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XVII-B on any such sum but is not deemed to be an assessee in default under the first proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 201; then, for the purpose of this sub-clause, it shall be deemed that the assessee has deducted and paid the tax on such sum on the date of furnishing of return of income by the resident payee referred to in the said proviso. The question before us, is whether second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act is prospective in application or is to be applied retrospectively. On the aforesaid question before us, we have the benefit of guidance from the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court, in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township (P.) Ltd. 377 ITR 635 (Delhi) in which the Hon'ble High Court held that second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act is declaratory and curative and it has retrospective effect from 01.04.2005. Revenue's Special Leave Petition against this order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Ansal Landmark Township (P.) Ltd. 242 Taxman 5 (SC). The view that second proviso of Section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act is declaratory and curative in nature and has retrospective effect from 01.04.2005 was also taken in Rajeev Kumar Agarwal vs. Addl. CIT 149 ITD 363 (Agra- Trib.); and in DCIT vs. Esaote India (NS) Ltd. 172 ITD 299 (Ahd.) and Hindustan Plywood Company vs. ITO (supra). The issue in question is squarely covered in favour of the assessee, in view of these precedents. Therefore, we also hold, respectfully following theses precedents, that second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) of I.T. Act is curative in nature and has retrospectively. Accordingly, in the fitness of things, and also as both ITA No.- 2885/Del/2016.