M/s The Sangrur Central Co-op Bank Ltd., Sangrur V. DCIT, Circle , Sangrur

ITA 1079/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4921 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-10-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 27-06-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Additional evidence; Non-deduction of tax; TDS
• Section: 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, B, CHANDIGARH . . , , BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 1079/CHD/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 M/S THE SANGRUR CENTRAL CO-OP BANK LTD., PATIALA GATE, SANGRUR VS. ! THE D CIT , CIRCLE, SANGRUR AAYKAR BHAWAN, SANGRUR ' # ./ PAN NO: AAAAT3920D '$/ APPELLANT &' '$ / RESPONDENT ()*+ /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI ASHOK GOYAL , CA *+ / REVENUE BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH, CIT DR , -*) .# /DATE OF HEARING : 26.08.2019 /0 *) .# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.10.2019 / ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESS EE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.04.2017 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS ) , PATIALA [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)]. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAS TAKEN FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.913197/- CONSIDERING FORM 15G/15H AS INVALID AND THERE WAS LIABILITY TO DEDUCT TDS WAS THERE, WHEN PAN NO. WAS ALREADY ITA NO. 1079-C-17 M/S THE SANGRUR CENTRAL COOP BANK LTD., SANGRUR 2 THERE WITH THE DEDUCTOR BEFORE CREDIT OF INTEREST. HENCE, THERE WAS NO TDS LIABILITY. 2. THAT THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.563437/-CONSIDERING TDS LIABILITY WAS THERE, AS FORM 15G/15H WERE RECEIVED LATE, HOWEVER, THE DEPOSITOR WERE AGRICULTURIST AND THE DEDUCTOR WAS AWARE OF THE FACT THAT THE INCOME OF THE DEPOSITOR IS NOT LIABLE TO BE TAX, HENCE, TD S WAS NOT DEDUCTED AND FORMS WERE ALSO RECEIVED BEFORE THE FILLING DATE. HENCE, THERE WAS NO LIABIL ITY TO DEDUCT TDS. 3. THAT THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS.243453/- WHEN FORM 15G/15H WERE AVAILABLE AND DUE TO NO OPPORTUNITY PROVIDED BY THE AO, THE SAME COULD NOT BE PRODUCED BEFORE AO. HENCE, THERE WAS NO LIABILITY TO DEDUCT TDS. 3. GROUND NO.1 : THE BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO THE ISSUE RAISED VID E GROUND NO.1 ARE THAT DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTICED THAT ASSESSEE HAD PAID INTEREST PAY MENTS TO VARIOUS PERSONS, HOWEVER, A PERUSAL OF THE FORM NOS. 15G A ND 15H FURNISHED BY THOSE PERSONS REVEALED THAT PAN NUMBERS OF THOSE PERSONS WERE NOT MENTIONED ON IT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THA T AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 206AA, SINCE THE RECIPIENTS OF INTEREST INCOME HAD NOT FURNISHED THEIR PAN NUMBERS, THEREFORE, TH E ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO DEDUCT THE TAX AT A HIGHER RATE. THE AS SESSING OFFICER, ACCORDINGLY HELD THAT THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 40( A)(IA) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') WERE ATTRACTED AND HE ACCORDINGLY ITA NO. 1079-C-17 M/S THE SANGRUR CENTRAL COOP BANK LTD., SANGRUR 3 MADE THE ADDITION OF EXPENDITURE OF RS. 9,13,197/ - U/S 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE UNSUCCESSFULLY CONTESTED THE ISSUE BEF ORE THE LD. CIT(A). 4. BEFORE US, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT THOUGH SOME OF THE RECIPIENTS DID NOT MENTION THEIR PAN NUMBERS, HOWEVER, SUBSEQUENTLY THE ASSESSEE OBTAINED THEIR PAN NUMBERS AND SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, BUT THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER FAILED TO TAKE NOTE OF THIS ASPECT AND THAT IN CERTAIN CASES THE PAN NUMBERS WERE ALREADY WITH THE ASSESSEE BANK AND, HENCE, THE SAME WAS ACCORDINGLY SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THAT SINCE THE PAN NUMBERS WERE ALREADY WITH THE ASSESSEE BANK, HENCE, IT BECOMES I MMATERIAL IF RECIPIENTS HAVE NOT MENTIONED THE SAME IN THE FORM NOS. 15G/15H. THAT THE PAN NUMBERS OF THOSE PERSONS WERE DULY SUPPLIED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5. THIS PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE REQUIRES FACTUAL EXAMI NATION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. WE, ACCORDINGLY, RESTORE THE GRO UND NO.1 TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE CONTENTION OF THE A SSESSEE WHETHER THE PAN NUMBER WERE SUBSEQUENTLY SUPPLIED DURING THE AS SESSMENT PROCEEDINGS AND IF FOUND SO, NOT TO MAKE DISALLOWAN CE ON THIS ISSUE. ITA NO. 1079-C-17 M/S THE SANGRUR CENTRAL COOP BANK LTD., SANGRUR 4 6. GROUND NO.2: VIDE GROUND NO. 2, THE ASSESSEE HAS AGITATED TH E CONFORMATION OF ADDITION OF RS. 5,63,437/- INTO THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF NON-DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOUR CE (TDS). THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, AT THE OUTSET, HA S PLEADED THAT THE TAX WAS DEDUCTED IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEARS AND DE POSITED ACCORDINGLY, HE, THEREFORE, HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE BE DECI DED IN THE LIGHT OF THE PROVISO OF SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT. THE PROVI SO TO SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT READS AS UNDER:- PROVIDED THAT WHERE IN RESPECT OF ANY SUCH SUM, TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED IN ANY SUBSEQUENT YEAR OR, HAS BEEN DEDUCTED IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR BUT PAID IN ANY SUBSEQUENT YEAR AFTER THE EXPIRY OF THE TIME PRESCRIBED UNDER SUB SECTION (1) OF SECTION 200, SU CH SUM SHALL BE ALLOWED AS A DEDUCTION IN COMPUTING THE INCOME OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR IN WHICH SUCH TAX HAS BEEN PAID. 7. WE ACCORDINGLY RESTORE THIS ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSE SSEE AND DECIDE THIS ISSUE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 8. GROUND NO;3 : GROUND NO.3 IS IN RESPECT OF THE ACTION OF THE L D. CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF RS. 2,43,453/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT GIVE PROPER OPPORTUNI TY TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH FORM NO. 15G/15H TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER D ESPITE THE FACT THAT ITA NO. 1079-C-17 M/S THE SANGRUR CENTRAL COOP BANK LTD., SANGRUR 5 THE SAME WERE READILY AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THAT DURING THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WERE FURNISHED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WHICH WERE FORWARDED TO THE ASSESSING OF FICER AND IT WAS FOUND THAT THE TDS WAS MADE ON THE PAYMENT OF INTER EST OF RS. 1,76,907/-. THE LD. CIT(A) ACCORDINGLY DELETED TH E ADDITION OF RS. 1,76,907/- OUT OF THE TOTAL ADDITION OF RS. 4,20,36 0/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LD. COUNSEL IN THIS RESPECT HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE CONFIRMATION OF THE REMAINING ADDITION BY THE CIT(A ) WAS WRONG AS THE REMAINING RECIPIENTS HAD DULY FURNISHED FORM NO. 15 GH / 15H AND THE SAME WERE READILY AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE. THAT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVE NOT BEEN P ROPERLY APPRECIATED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. THAT THE MATTER BE RESTO RED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER SO AS TO GIVE PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH THE EVIDENCES AND FOR PROPER AND THOROUGH V ERIFICATION OF SUCH EVIDENCES BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 9. THE LD. DR, ON THE OTHER HAND, HAS RELIED ON THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. 10. CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS, SINCE THE MA TTER NEEDS FACTUAL EXAMINATION BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OF THE EVIDENC ES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE, HENCE, WE RESTORE THE MATTER ON THIS ISSU E TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO ADMIT THE ADD ITIONAL EVIDENCES, IF ITA NO. 1079-C-17 M/S THE SANGRUR CENTRAL COOP BANK LTD., SANGRUR 6 ANY, FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE ON THIS ISSUE, EXAMI NE AND VERIFY THE SAME AND DECIDE THIS ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WIT H LAW. THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS ALLOWED FO R STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21.10.2019. SD/- SD/- ( . . / N.K. SAINI) ( ! / SANJAY GARG) '#$ / VICE PRESIDENT %& / JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 21.10.2019 1*&)2343) / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. '$ / THE APPELLANT 2. &' '$ / THE RESPONDENT 3. , 5) / CIT 4. , 5) ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. 36 &)7 , . 7 , 89:; / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. :< - / GUARD FILE 1 , / BY ORDER, = / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR