Bahadurbhai B Desai (HUF), Vapi V. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Valsad

ITA 123/SRT/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1657 (ITAT-SURAT)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 21-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Appeal Filed On: 16-05-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; TDS
• Section: 234E; 200A

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलȣय अͬधकरण, स ु रत Ûयायपीठ, स ु रत IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं./ITA No.123/SRT/2022 (AY 2020-21) (Hearing in Physical Court) Bahadurbhai B Desai (HUF) B/h Juni Haveli, Vapi- 396191 PAN : AABHB 6224 Q Vs Income Tax Officer, (TDS), Valsad, Room No. 402, Palak Arcade, Shanti Nagar, Tithal Road, Valsad -396001 अपीलाथȸ/Appellant Ĥ×यथȸ /Respondent Ǔनधा[ǐरती कȧ ओर से /Assessee by Ms. Amrin Pathan, C.A राजèव कȧ ओर से /Revenue by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of hearing 22.09.2022 उɮघोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of pronouncement 22.09.2022 Order under section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi [for short to as “Ld. NFAC”]/Ld. CIT(A) for assessment year 2020-21 dated 17.03.2022, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed under section 200A r.ws. 206CB of Income-Tax Act (Act) dated 12.10.2020 for financial year 2019-20. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - ITA No.123/SRT/2022 (A.Y 20-21) Bahadurbhai B Desai (HUF) 2 “1.The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘CIT(A)’] erred in fact and in law in passing the order ex parte. 2.The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in passing an order without granting proper opportunity of being heard. 3.The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in passing an ex parte order against the principle of natural justice. 4.The learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in passing an order ex parte without appreciating the fact that adjournment was filed in response to notice fixed for hearing. 5. Without prejudice to above, the learned CIT(A) erred in fact and in law in confirming the action of CPC TDS in charging late filing fees of Rs.83,200 u/s 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act”)” 2. Brief facts of the case are that Central Processing Centre, Ghaziabad while processing the TDS for First quarter of FY 2019-20 created/generated demand of Rs.83,200/- vide intimation dated 18.10.2020. 3. Aggrieved by the order of CPC-TDS, the assessee filed appeal which was migrated to Ld. NFAC/ Ld.CIT(A) and was and dismissed vide order dated 17.03.2022. The Ld. CIT(A) /NFAC while dismissal the appeal of assessee held that no submission was uploaded in ITBA portal on behalf of assessee. The Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) held that TDS statement was not filed within the time prescribed under section 200(3). Therefore, ITA No.123/SRT/2022 (A.Y 20-21) Bahadurbhai B Desai (HUF) 3 CPC has rightly levied the late filing fees under section 234E. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) the has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. 4. We have heard the submission of Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) for the assessee and the Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Ld. Sr.DR) for the Revenue and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) passed ex parte order without providing reasonable and sufficient opportunity of being heard to assessee. Ld. AR for the assessee submits that ld CIT(A) issued two notices to the assessee vide notice dated on 30.06.2021 and 15.03.2-22, copies of such notices are filed. Vide first notice, the ld CIT(A) required to furnish submissions on or before 15.07.2021, in response to said notice the ae requested adjournment till 30.07.2021 as the details were under compilation. Thereafter, the assessee again received second notice dated on 07.03.2022 to file submissions up to 15.03.2021, the assessee sought adjournment vide application uploaded on ITBA web-site on system up to 30.03.2022, however, the Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) ITA No.123/SRT/2022 (A.Y 20-21) Bahadurbhai B Desai (HUF) 4 passed order on 17.03.2022 without considering the adjournment application of assessee. Ld. AR for the assessee submits that assessee has a good case on merit and is likely to succeeds if one more opportunity is given to assessee to contest the case on merit. Ld. AR for the assessee submits copy of notice dated 17.03.2022 and screenshot of ITBA web- site showing the status of adjournment upto 30.03.2022 is also filed before the Tribunal. The ld AR for the assessee undertook to be more vigilant in future and not to seek time without valid in future and not to seek time reasons. 5. On the other hand, Ld. Sr. DR for the Revenue submits that assessee was given reasonable opportunity to furnish his sufficient details to substantiate the grounds of assessee’s appeal. The assessee does not deserve any leniency at this stage. Even otherwise the issue raised in the present appeal is against the ae by the decision of Jurisdictional High Court. 6. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that ld CIT(A) while issuing notice dated 07.03.2021, directed to file details and submissions on or ITA No.123/SRT/2022 (A.Y 20-21) Bahadurbhai B Desai (HUF) 5 before 15.03.2022. The assessee uploaded his application on ITBA System 15.03.2022 for seeking adjournment till 30.03.2022. The screen shot of the ITBA portal clearly shows that the assessee filed application for seeking further time up till 30.03.2022. The Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) without considering the adjournment application and referring thereto in the order held that assessee was given sufficient notice and no submission uploaded in ITBA web-site portal. We find that observation of Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to there own record. The Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the adjournment application on the ground of natural justice. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that assessee was not given sufficient and reasonable opportunity of hearing, therefore, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee is restored back to the file of Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. Needless the Ld.NFAC/Ld. CIT(A) before passing the order shall grant fair and reasonable opportunity being heard to assessee. The assessee is also directed to furnish all necessary evidence & ITA No.123/SRT/2022 (A.Y 20-21) Bahadurbhai B Desai (HUF) 6 information without any further delay and not to seek adjournment without any valid reasons. 7. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing. Sd/- Sd/- (Dr ARJUN LAL SAINI) (PAWAN SINGH) [लेखा सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] [᭠याियक सद᭭य JUDICIAL MEMBER] Surat, Dated: 22/09/2022 Dkp. Out Sourcing Sr.P.S Copy to: 1. Appellant- 2. Respondent- 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT 5. DR 6. Guard File True copy/ By order // True Copy // Sr.P.S./Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Surat