Shree Deepkala Processors, Jetpur V. The ACIT(CPC) TDS, Ghaziabad

ITA 164/RJT/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0016 (ITAT-RAJKOT)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 6 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 17-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 06-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 194C; 200A

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT [CONDUCTED THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT] Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Deepkala Process ors Dho raji Road, Jetp ur PAN: AABF D593 2H (Appellant) Vs The ACIT, TDS, CPC, Bangalore (Resp ondent) Asses see by : None Revenue by : Shri B. D. Gupta, Sr. D. R. Date of hearing : 18-10 -2 022 Date of pronouncement : 20-10 -2 022 आदेश /ORDER PER :SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER :- This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jamnagar in Appeal no. CIT(A)- Jam/121/17-18/1547 vide order dated 27/03/2018 passed for the assessment year 2015-16. ITA No. 164 /Rjt/2018 Assessment Year 2015-16 I.T.A No. 164/Rjt/2018 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No. Shree Deepkala Processors vs. ACIT (CPC)TDS 2 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1) WE LEARNED DEPARTMENT HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THERE IS SHORT PAYMENT OF 41,543 AND WRONGLY RAISED THE DEMAND WITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION AND CLARIFICATION. 2) HE LEARNED DEPARTMENT HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THERE IS INTERST 9292.50 AND WRONGLY RAISED THE DEMAND WITHOUT ANY JUSTIFICATION AND CLARIFICATION. 3) ANY OTHER GROUND THAT MAY BE RAISED AT THE TIME OF HEARING.” 3. The brief facts the case are that the assessee received notice under section 200A of the Act for short deduction of taxes and also interest was imposed on account of the afore-mentioned short deduction. In appeal, the assessee submitted that in the notice it is not clear as to in respect of which deductee there was a short deduction of taxes on part of the assessee, since there are several deductees to whom payments have been made under several sessions i.e. 194A, 194J, 194C etc. Further, the assessee submitted no opportunity of being heard was granted to the assessee and it was not clear to the assessee as to what was the cause of short deduction of taxes, which according the assessee have been arbitrarily and wrongly processed and hence the demand raised is incorrect. The assessee submitted before Ld. CIT(Appeals) that the demand seems to be more of a technical fault by CPC I.T.A No. 164/Rjt/2018 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No. Shree Deepkala Processors vs. ACIT (CPC)TDS 3 Ghaziabad and from the notice of demand, the assessee is unable to ascertain the cause of short deduction due to lack of information in the said notice. However, the Ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed assessee’s appeal with the following observations: “Decision : The grounds of appeal of the appellant are reproduced in initial paragraph of this appeal order. The submission dated 20/11/2017 of the appellant with regard to its grounds of appeal is not found to be tenable. The fact is that there was short deduction of tax at source to the extent of Rs. 2444/-and therefore, ACIT, CPC Ghaziabad has correctly passed the order by holding the appellant as assessee in default. The ACIT, CPC Ghaziabad has also correctly charge the interest of Rs. 447/- on the short payment of Rs. 2444/-. The appellant in his submission dated 20/11/2017 has relied upon decision of hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Hindustan Coca Cola Beverage Vs. CIT, 293 ITR 226. But in my opinion ratio of this decision of Hon. Supreme Court and also circular no. 275/201/95J-IT (B) dated 29/01/1997 are not applicable to the case of the appellant in view of the fact that the appellant has not been able to furnish any evidences and details to show that the payee has shown the amount/income received from the appellant as his income in his return of income filed for the year under consideration and has paid due tax on the same. In absence of any proof, the submission dated 20/11/2017 of the appellant is rejected and the addition of Rs. 2444/- on account of short payment as made by the ACIT, CPC Ghaziabad I.T.A No. 164/Rjt/2018 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No. Shree Deepkala Processors vs. ACIT (CPC)TDS 4 and also levy of interest of Rs. 447/-on this short payment are hereby confirmed. Thus the grounds of appeal of the appellant are dismissed.” 4. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order of Ld. CIT(Appeals). Before us, the assessee reiterated that the cause of issuance of notice under section 200A of the Act is not known to the assessee and it seems to be more on account of a technical default on the part of CPC, Ghaziabad. Further, Ld. CIT(Appeals) did not give adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee, so as to enable the assessee to present its case on merits. 5. In our view, considering the instant set of facts, in the interests of justice, we are hereby restoring the case to the file of the AO to grant a fresh opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present its case on merits. Accordingly, the case is been restored to the file of AO for fresh adjudication. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED) (SIDHHARTHA NAUTIYAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 20/10/2022 आदेश क त ल प अ े षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- I.T.A No. 164/Rjt/2018 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No. Shree Deepkala Processors vs. ACIT (CPC)TDS 5 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order, Assistant Registrar, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot