Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"on consideration of the reports of disturbance of general life caused due to floods and heavy rains, the CBDT, in exercise of powers conferred under section 119 of I. T. Act, 1961, hereby extends the due date of filing of returns of income for the assessment year 2010-11 from 30.09.2010 to 15th October, 2010."

Thus, due date of filing of return of income for the assessment year under consideration in the case of appellant was extended from 30.9.2010 to 15.10.10. Since the provision of section 40(a)(ia) refer to due date specified in sub-section (1) of section 139 for filing of return of income, once the due date of filing of return of income has been extended by the Board. In my opinion, the extended date shall also apply for purpose of compliance with section 40(a)(ia). As the Board has extended time for filing of return of income in view of disturbance of general life caused by floods and heavy rains, it is reasonable to consider that the extension shall apply in respect of deposit of TDS as well. The floods & heavy rains would impact activity like deposit of TDS in bank in the same manner as filing of return. Therefore, while order u/s 119 dated 27.9.2010 refers to filing of return and does not specifically refer to section 40(a)(ia), the benefit of extension of due date of filing of return shall, in my opinion, be available even for purpose of section 40(1)(ia). It is well settled position of law that where there is ambiguity and two plausible views exist in a matter, the view favorable to the assessee should be adopted. This has been held in a number of cases including decision of Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs.Vegetable Products Ltd.88 ITR 192 (SC) The appellant has deposited TDS u/s 194C on 06.10.2010 which is well within the extended due date for filing of return of income. Therefore, in my opinion, disallowance of same under section 40(a)(ia) is not proper. It may also be mentioned that even if a view is taken that amount is to be disallowed in this year, then in view of proviso to section 40(a)(ia), deduction for the same would have to be given in subsequent year on payment basis. Thus, over a period of two years, the exercise would be revenue neutral and there CESC Ltd. , AY- 2010-11 would be no net impact on income or tax liability. Considering all these factors, the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) is deleted. "