The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-SDM, Patiala V. ITO (TDS), Patiala

ITA 1007/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6493 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-02-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 30-07-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHANDRA KANTA
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 133A; 201(1)

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH , !'# $ % &' , '( BEFORE: SH. SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1007/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15 LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER - CUM - SDM, PATIALA. THE ACIT, CIRCLE, PATIALA. ./ TAN NO: PTLSI14234D / APPELLANT / RESPONDENT !/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI DEEPAK AGGARWAL ' !/ REVENUE BY : SMT. CHANDRAKANTA, SR.DR # $ %/ DATE OF HEARING : 19.02.2019 &'() %/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.02.2019 / ORDER PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.05.2018 OF THE COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-I LUDHIANA [HEREINAFTER REFERR ED TO AS CIT(A)] RELATING TO 2014-15 ASSESSMENT YEAR. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: 1. THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FA CTS IN CONCURRING WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE LD. AO IN LEVYING THE INTEREST U/S 201(1A) BY HOLDING THAT THE APPELLANT HAS MADE THE PAYMENT TO THE INDIVIDUAL BE NEFICIARY AND THERE IS A DELAY IN MAKING THE PAYMENT BY THE APPELLANT TO THE RESPO NDENT-DEPARTMENT WHEREAS AS PER THE APPELLANT THE SAID FINDING IS ER RONEOUS AND THERE IS NO DELAY IN MAKING THE PAYMENT WITH THE RESPONDENT-DEPARTMEN T, IT IS THEREFORE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER LEVYING INTEREST MAY KINDLY BE SET-A SIDE. 2. THAT THE ASSESSEE PRAYS FOR ANY CONSEQUENTIAL RELIE F AND/OR LEGAL CLAIM ARISING OUT OF THIS APPEAL BEFORE THE DISPOSAL OF T HE SAME. 3. THAT THE ASSESSEE PRAYS FOR ANY ADDITION, DELETION, AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE DI SPOSAL OF THE SAME IN THE INTEREST OF SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA-1007/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE 2 OF 3 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS THE LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR-CUM-SDM, PATIALA. A SUR VEY UNDER SECTION 133A OF THE ACT WAS CONDUCTED AT THE OFFICE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 10.01.2014 AND ASSESSEE WAS FOUN D LIABLE FOR PAYMENT OF INTEREST OF RS. 3,73,860/-UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 201(1A), CALCULATED @ ONE AND HALF PERCE NT FOR EVERY MONTH OR PART OF A MONTH ON THE AMOUNT OF TAX DEDUC TED AND DELAYED DEPOSIT OF THE SAME BEYOND THE PRESCRIBED T IME ON 23.01.2014. THE AO DECLARED THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAUL T U/S 201(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT FOR NOT DEPOSITING THE TDS INTO CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT WITHIN TIME AS PER PROVI SIONS OF CHAPTER XVIIB OF THE ACT AND DEMAND OF INTEREST AMO UNTING TO RS. 3,73,860/- WAS RAISED. 4. THE CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANC ES, CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE AO AGAINST WHICH THE ASS ESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. BOTH THE PARTIES STATE THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE O RDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ITSELF IN ITA NO. 1516/CHD/2017 DATED 13.04.2018 IN REVENUES APPEAL. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE AFOREMENTI ONED APPEAL ARE AS UNDER : 5. WE OBSERVE THAT, THE ACTION OF THE PR IS QUITE CLEA R FROM THE CONDUCT OF DEPOSITING THE TDS AFTER RELEASE FROM THE HON'BLE C OURT ON 09/01/2014 TO THE TREASURY AND DEPOSITED THE SAME ON 23/01/2014 IMMED IATELY AFTER THE RECEIPT OF FUNDS. THE LETTER OF PUDA TO DEDUCT TDS HAS NO APPL ICATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THE MATTER WAS SUB-JUDICE IN THE COURT. MERE F ACT THAT THE PR HAS DEPOSITED TDS IN ITS TAN WILL NOT MAKE HIM RESPONSIBLE BECAUS E HE HAD DONE IT IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE COURT. THE PROVIS IONS OF SEC. 194A OF THE ACT ORE QUITE CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS IN THIS REGARD. THE LAW IS CLEAR THAT ONLY THE PERSON WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAKING THE PAYMENT IS REQUIRED T O MAKE TDS AT THE TIME OF ITS CREDIT TO THE ACCOUNT OF SUCH PERSON OR AT THE TIME OF MAK ING PAYMENT. IN THE FACTS AND ITA-1007/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2014-15 PAGE 3 OF 3 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE PR CANNOT BE HELD RES PONSIBLE FOR NON DEDUCTION OF THE TDS AS NO PAYMENT HAS BEEN MADE TO THE BENEFICIARIE S BY THE PR TILL THE FINAL ORDER OF THE COURT. AND SINCE THERE WAS NO DELAY IN PAYMENT OF TDS TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT BY THE PR AFTER RELEASE OF THE AMOUNT, WE H EREBY HOLD THAT NO VIOLATION OF TDS PROVISIONS ARE ATTRACTED WITH RELATION TO THE PR. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. 6. CONSIDERING FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND THA T THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE TR IBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1516/CHD/2017 DATED 13.04.2018. THEREFORE, FOLLOWING THE SAME, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE STAN DS ALLOWED. 7. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 19 TH FEBRUARY, 2019. SD/- SD/- ( ) ( # $ % &' ) (SANJAY GARG) (ANNAPURNA GUPTA ) '(/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER +/ JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM *'+ ,-.-/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT 3. ** # // CIT 4. ** # /()/ THE CIT(A) 5. -234,*%*4,67839/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 38:$/ GUARD FILE *'+ # / BY ORDER / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR