Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0476 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
8 month(s) 8 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
19-06-2020
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Allowed
Bench Allotted
C
Assessment Year
2012-2013
Appeal Filed On
11-10-2019
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES C BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A.K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2208 /BANG/201 9 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 201 2 - 13 ) M/S. C CENTRIC SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD. , NO.113, SOBHA SUNFLOWER, BASAVANAGAR, BANGALORE - 560 037 .APPELLANT PAN AADCC 1896C VS. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CPC, BANGALORE. RESPONDENT. ASSESSEE BY: SHRI G.S. PRASHANTH, C.A. REVENUE BY: SHRI K.N. DANDAPANI, ADDL. CIT (D.R) DATE OF HEARING : 16.06 .20 20 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19 .06 .20 20 O R D E R PER SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM : THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 10 , BANGALORE PASSED U/S . 200A AND 250 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLL OWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL : 2 ITA NO. 2208/BANG/2019 3 ITA NO. 2208/BANG/2019 3. THE BRIEF FACT S OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF DESIGNING, DEVELOPING AND MARKETING AND SUPPORTING VARIOUS SERVICES INCLUDING PROVIDING PROGRAMMING, CONVERSIONS, ELECTRONIC DATA, SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, SALES & MAR KETING, SUPPORTING & MAINTENANCE AND OTHER TECHNICAL SERVICES TO NEW AND ESTABLISHED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES, NE TWORK SERVICE PROVIDERS, ETC. THE ASSESSEE HAS AVAILED SERVICES FROM M/S. CDC SOFTWARE SINGAPORE PTE LTD., SINGAPORE AND M/S. PIVOTAL T ECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. AND MADE PAYMENTS FOR THE SERVICES , WHICH ARE IN THE NATURE OF FEES FOR TECHNICAL SERVICES AND TAX HAS TO BE DEDUCTED AT 10% ON SUCH PAYMENTS. THE ASSESSEE HAS F ILED TDS R ETURNS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME TAX A CT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). SUBSEQUEN TLY THE ORDER HAS BEEN PASSED BY THE TDS - C PC UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE ACT HOLDING THAT TDS HAS TO BE DEDUCTED AT SOURCE AT THE RATE 4 ITA NO. 2208/BANG/2019 @ 20% UNDER SECTION 195(1) R.W.S. 206AA AS THE PAN OF THE RECIPIENT WAS NOT MENT IONED IN THE RETURNS. HENCE DEMAND FOR SHORT DEDUCTION OF RS.19 , 12,977 / - WAS RAISED ALONG WITH INTEREST AND LATE PAYMENT CHARGES. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT THE ORDERS PASSED UNDER SECTION 200A BY TDS - CPC WERE NEVER SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE PHYSICALLY OR OTHERWISE AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE FACT THAT SUCH OR DERS WERE PASSED IN ITS CASE. T HE ASSESSEE COME TO KNOW ABOUT THE OUTSTANDING DEMAND , WHEN BEING PRESSED BY THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND IMMEDIATELY FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) WITH DELAY AND THE AP PEAL WAS DISMISSED. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL WITH THE TRIBUNAL. 4. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT NO ORDERS UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE ACT WAS SERVED ON T HE ASSESSEE TILL DATE AND THE QUESTION OF FILING THE APPEAL WITH DELAY DOES NOT ARISE. THE ASSESSEE AFTER COMING TO KNOW OF THE SITUATION , THAT ORDERS ARE UPLOADED IN THE PORTAL OF I.T. DEPARTMENT, IMMEDIATELY HAS FILED APPEAL AND THERE WAS NO DELAY . FURTH ER, T HE ASSESSEE WAS DEPRIVED OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE THE CASE ON MERIT S AND PRAYED FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO SUBSTANTIATE BE FORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITIES. CONTRA, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIV E SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE CIT (APPEALS). 5 ITA NO. 2208/BANG/2019 5. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL O N RECORD. WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO DELAY IN FILING O F THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE AS NO ORDER UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE ACT WAS PHYS ICALLY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. HENCE THE QUESTION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL DOES NOT ARISE AND TH EREFORE THE APPEAL IS WITHIN THE TIME . WE FIND IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CASE, THE CO - ORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NOS.3072 TO 3080/BANG/2018 DT.7.6.2019 HAS HELD AT PAGE 4 PARA 8 TO 11 OF THE ORDER WHICH IS READ AS UNDER : 8. AFTER HEARING THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THERE IS NO DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE, AS NO ORDER U/S. 200A OF THE ACT FOR ALL THESE YEARS, HAS BEEN PHYSICALLY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE TILL DATE . THESE ORDERS HAVE NOT ALSO BEEN SERVED ELECTRONICALLY. HENCE THE QUESTION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS DOES NOT ARISE. THE APPEALS, IN OUR VIEW, HAVE BEEN FILED WITHIN THE PERIOD OF LIMITATION. 9. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) COULD NOT HAVE DISMISSED THE APPEA LS FOR THE REASON THAT ORDER U/S. 200A WAS NOT UPLOADED ALONG WITH FORM 35. DEFECTS, IF ANY, COULD HAVE BEEN RECTIFIED BY GIVING NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS GIVEN LIBERTY TO DOWNLOAD THESE ORDERS FROM THE PORTAL OF THE INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT AND FILE THE SAME BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ELECTRONICALLY OR OTHERWISE. THE THIRD GROUND ON WHICH THE CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS THAT SEPARATE APPEALS WERE NOT FILED AGAINST EACH ORDER. THIS DEFECT SHOULD HAVE ALSO BEEN BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE O F THE ASSESSEE AND AN OPPORTUNITY GIVEN TO RECTIFY THE SAME. LIBERTY IS GRANTED TO THE ASSESSEE TO FILE SEPARATE APPEALS AS REQUIRED BY LAW. 10. THE LD. CIT(A) NOR ANY AUTHORITY HAD CONSIDERED ALL THESE ISSUES ON MERITS AND DISPOSED OF THE SAME IN ACCORDA NCE WITH THE LAW. ONLY THE COMPUTER HAS PROCESSED THE ORDERS. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES, IN OUR VIEW, IT WOULD MEET THE ENDS OF JUSTICE IF ALL THE ORDERS U/S. 200A OF THE ACT ARE SET ASIDE AND MATTER RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO, TO ISSUE NOTICE TO THE AS SESSEE, CONSIDER ITS OBJECTIONS ON THE MATTER AND THEREAFTER DISPOSE OF THE CASES ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. HENCE, WE SET ASIDE ALL THE IMPUGNED ORDERS PASSED U/S. 200A OF THE ACT FOR ALL THESE YEARS AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESS ING OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 11. IN THE RESULT, ALL THESE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. ACCORDINGLY, WE FOUND THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE ARE SIMILAR TO THE DECISION OF TH E CO - ORDINATE BENCH AND FALLO W THE JUDICIAL PRECEDENCE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET THE ORDER OF CIT ( A) AND RESTORE ENTIRE DISPUTED ISSUES TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING 6 ITA NO. 2208/BANG/2019 OFFICER FOR FRESH ADJUDICAT ION AND VERIFICATION AND PASS A SPEAKING ORDER. FURTHER, T HE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE PROVIDED ADEQUATE OPP ORTUNITY OF HEARING AND SHALL CO - OPERATE IN SUBMITTING THE INFORMATION AND WE ALLOW THE GROUND S OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEE'S APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN TH E OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/ - SD/ - ( A.K. GARODIA ) (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 19 .06. 20 20 . *REDDY GP COPY TO 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. CIT (A) 4. PR. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE
Mehul