Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 2 of 2 (0.20 seconds)The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, West ... vs M/S. Vegetables Products Ltd on 29 January, 1973
4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that, by virtue of the amendment of the statute,
incorporating the second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia), the rigour
of the provision as to effect of non-deduction of tax payable on
interest paid has been virtually watered down. It is stated that,
the assessment was finalised in the case of the petitioner,
disallowing the claim for interest paid by the petitioner to the
sister concern, in connection with the borrowal of money in the
course of transactions. It is stated that, the sister concern of the
petitioner has already satisfied the entire tax and in the said
W.P.(C) No.27987 of 2014 3
circumstances, proceedings have been finalised in respect of the
sister concern, as borne by Exts.P5 and P6 orders passed by the
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) for the concerned
assessment years. This being the position, there is absolutely no
rhyme or reason to have proceeded against the petitioner and
hence this writ petition, to cause Ext.P3 to be considered and
disposed of. The learned counsel also points out that, the 2nd
respondent has relied on the decision rendered by the Calcutta
High Court as well as the Gujarat High Court, without any regard
to the law declared by the Allehabad High Court. Referring to the
decision rendered by the Madras Bench of the concerned Tribunal
in C.O. No.155(Mds) of 2013 in ITA No.2076 of 2012, the learned
Senior Counsel points out that, if two views are available, the one
which is favourable to the assessee has to be adopted, in view of
the law declared by the Apex Court as per the law declared in
(1973) 88 ITR 192 (SC) (Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.
Vegetable Products Ltd.) (which in turn has been followed by
the Madras Bench of the Tribunal).
1