COURT: | ITAT Kolkata |
CORAM: | Mahavir Singh (JM), P. K. Bansal (AM) |
SECTION(S): | 197A, 40(a)(ia) |
GENRE: | Domestic Tax |
CATCH WORDS: | TDS deduction, TDS disallowance |
COUNSEL: | Miraj D. Shah |
DATE: | May 22, 2015 (Date of pronouncement) |
DATE: | May 27, 2015 (Date of publication) |
AY: | 2008-09 |
FILE: | Click here to view full post with file download link |
CITATION: | |
S. 40(a)(ia) second proviso was inserted by FA 2012 to rectify the unintended consequence of disallowance in the hands of the payer even if the payee has paid tax. It is curative and retrospective in operation. Assessee's claim of having obtained declarations u/s 197A from the payees should not be disbelieved without evidence. Assessee is not expected to go into the correctness of the declarations filed by the payees |
The second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act inserted by the Finance Act, 2012 is curative in nature and intended to supply an obvious omission, take care of an unintended consequence and make the section workable. Section 40(a)(ia) without the second proviso resulted in the unintended consequence of disallowance of legitimate business expenditure even in a case where the payee in receipt of the income had paid tax. It has for long been the legal position that if the payee has paid tax on his income, no recovery of any tax can be made from the person who had failed to deduct the income tax at source from such amount
Recent Comments