Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held that the Tribunal was right in deleting the disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) because the amendment to section 9 had not been passed at the relevant point of time and the assessee was not liable to deduct the taxes when the assessee had made the payments to non-residents towards the charges for sampling and analysis of cargo at destination port and for professional and consultancy fees. Relied on Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (P) Ltd. D. CIT [2021] 432 ITR 471 (SC), (2022) 3 SCC 321, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 159 the Supreme Court held that the two Latin maxims are applicable in all cases-lex non cogit ad impossibbilia.i.e. the law does not demand the impossible and impotentia excusat legem, i.e. when there is a disability that makes it impossible to obey the law, the alleged disobedience of the law is excused. (AY. 2010-11)
ACIT v. Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt. Ltd. (2024) 471 ITR 273 (Bom) (HC)
S. 40(a)(ia) : Amounts not deductible-Deduction at source-Fees for technical services-Insertion of explanation to Section 9 By Finance Act, 2010 with effect from 1-6-1976-No disallowance can be made-Interpretation-General principles-Principles of lex non cogit ad impossibilla, and impotentia excust legem.[S.9(1)(vii), 195, 260A
Leave a Reply