Punjab National Bank , Jalpaiguri V. ITO (TDS), Ward - 6(1), Jalpaiguri , Jalpaiguri

ITA 1910/KOL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 108 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8303 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 6 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 26-03-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAUL ACIT
• Assessee Lawyers: PURAN CHATTERJEE; RITA MUKHERJEE
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; TDS; Set aside
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C (VIRTUAL COURT HEARING), BENCH KOLKATA BEFORE SRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NOS.1910 TO 1912/KOL/2018 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2013-14 TO 2015-16 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK.........APPELLANT KADAMTALA, P.O. JALPAIGURI, DIST. JALPAIGURI - 735101. [PAN : AAACP0165G] VS. ITO (TDS), WARD-6(1), JALPAIGURI......RESPONDENT APPEARANCES BY: MS. RITA MUKHERJEE & SHRI PURAN CHATTERJEE, AR APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT. SHRI SUPRIYO PAUL, ACIT, DR, APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT. DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING : FEBRUARY 04, 2021 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : MARCH 26, 2021 HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- THE PRESENT APPEALS HAVE BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2013-14 TO 2015-16 AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS), JALPAIGURI [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)]. SINCE THE ISSUES INVOLVED IN ALL THE THREE APPEALS ARE IDENTICAL IN NATURE, HENCE THESE APPEALS ARE TAKEN TOGETHER FOR ADJUDICATION. THE FACTS, FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, HAVE BEEN TAKEN FROM ITA NO.1910/KOL/2019. 2. THE ASSESSEE IN THIS APPEAL HAS CONTESTED THE ACTION OF THE CIT(A) IN SUSTAINING THE ADDITION OF RS.50,930/- MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE AS ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT U/S 201(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND THEREBY RAISING THE DEMAND U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ON ACCOUNT OF NON-DEDUCTION OF TDS ON INTEREST PAID TO ONE OF ITS CUSTOMERS NAMELY SHRI PRADIP KUMAR SARKAR. 2 I.T.A. NOS.1910 TO 1912/KOL/2018 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2013-14 TO 2015-16 3. THE BRIEF FACTS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE ARE THAT THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) CARRIED OUT A SPOT VERIFICATION IN THE OFFICE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE-BANK AND FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO DEDUCT TDS ON INTEREST PAID TO FOUR CUSTOMERS. ON FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE-BANK TO EXPLAIN THE DEFAULT IN THIS RESPECT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER RAISED A DEMAND OF RS.1,32,983/- U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 4. IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE FURNISHED REQUISITE FORM NO.15G/15H IN RESPECT OF THREE CUSTOMERS AND STATED THAT THE TDS WAS NOT REQUIRED TO BE DEDUCTED IN THE CASE OF THE AFORESAID THREE CUSTOMERS. HOWEVER, IN CASE OF THE FOURTH CUSTOMER NAMELY SHRI PRADIP KUMAR SARKAR, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE REQUISITE FORM. THE LD. CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE EVIDENCES FURNISHED BEFORE HIM SET ASIDE THE DEMAND IN RESPECT OF THE THREE CUSTOMERS IN WHOSE CASE FORM NO.15G/15H WERE FURNISHED BEFORE HIM. SINCE THERE WAS NO EXPLANATION FURNISHED IN RESPECT OF THE FOURTH CUSTOMER, THE LD. CIT(A) SUSTAINED THE DEMAND RAISED IN THAT RESPECT AMOUNTING TO RS.50,930/-. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE SAID ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE HAS COME IN APPEAL BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL. 6. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE-BANK SUBMITTED THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 201, IF THE ASSESSEE-BANK IS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THE PAYEE HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THE INTEREST INCOME PAID BY THE ASSESSEE-BANK TO HIM FOR THE PURPOSE OF FURNISHING OF RETURN OF INCOME AND HAS PAID DUE TAXES, THEN IN THAT EVENT, THE ASSESSEE WILL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE AN ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DUE TO OVERSIGHT AND RUSH OF WORK, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT PRODUCE THE RELEVANT EVIDENCES/DOCUMENTS IN THIS RESPECT BEFORE THE A.O. THE LD. COUNSEL HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE MAY BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO VERIFY AS TO WHETHER THE PAYEE HAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THE INTEREST INCOME FOR INCOME-TAX PURPOSES AND HAS PAID DUE TAXES ON HIS INCOME SO DISCLOSED. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE MATTER MAY BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH VERIFICATION IN THIS RESPECT. THE LD. DR HAS NOT OBJECTED TO THE SAME. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, FOR THE SAKE OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, THE MATTER BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL GIVE PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE TO FURNISH NECESSARY EVIDENCES IN THIS RESPECT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER WILL ALSO CONSIDER THE REQUEST OF THE ASSESSEE, IF ANY, MADE IN THIS RESPECT TO CALL FOR VERIFICATION OR TO SUMMON THE PAYEE FOR VERIFICATION OF THE STATUS OF THE INTEREST INCOME EARNED BY HIM FROM THE ASSESSEE AS TO WHETHER 3 I.T.A. NOS.1910 TO 1912/KOL/2018 PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2013-14 TO 2015-16 THE SAME HAS BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT FOR INCOME-TAX PURPOSES OR NOT AND THEREAFTER TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE FACTS AND ISSUES INVOLVED BEING IDENTICAL, OUR FINDINGS ARRIVED ABOVE, WILL ALSO BE ACCORDINGLY APPLIED TO THE ANOTHER CAPTIONED APPEAL ALSO. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE TREATED AS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. KOLKATA, THE 26 TH MARCH, 2021. SD/- SD/- [ J. SUDHAKAR REDDY ] [ SANJAY GARG] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED :26.03.2021 RS COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK 2. ITO (TDS), WARD-6(1), JALPAIGURI, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, NAYABASTI, JALPAIGURI-735101. 3. CIT(A)- 4. CIT- , 5. CIT(DR), //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR , KOLKATA BENCHES