ITO(TDS), Moradabad V. M/s. P.V.V.N.L. Electricity Test Division, Rampur

ITA 2776/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7327 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC 2
• Next Hearing Date: 13-06-2016
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 05-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N J SINGH

Judgement Text

1 ITA 2776/DEL/2014 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH SMC-2 NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA : ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NS. 2776/DEL/2014 ASSTT. YR: 2008-09 INCOME-TAX OFFICER (TDS), VS. PVVNL ELECTRICITY TE ST DIVISION, MORADABAD. OLD POWER HOUSE, NEAR MALL GODOWN CIVIL LINES, RAMPUR. PAN: LKNPO 6066 E ( APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI N.J. SINGH SR. DR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 13/06/2016. DATE OF ORDER : 14/06/2016. O R D E R THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 4.2.2014, PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-BAREILLY, RELATING TO AY 2008-09. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AO PASSED O RDER U/S 201/201(1A) IN RESPECT OF TDS RETURN IN FORM 24Q IN RESPECT OF 4TH QUARTER OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007 VIDE ORDER DATED 25.3.2011. THE SHORT DED UCTION WAS COMPUTED AT RS. 3,14,650/- U/S 201 AND INTEREST U/S 201(1A) WAS COMPUTED AT RS. 2 ITA 2776/DEL/2014 1,20,120/-. THUS, TOTAL LIABILITY OF RS. 4,34,70/- WAS DETERMINED. SIMILARLY, IN RESPECT OF FY 2008-09 THE SHORT DEDUCTION U/S 201 W AS COMPUTED AT RS. 3,88,590 AND INTEREST U/S 201(1A) WAS COMPUTED AT R S. 1,16,520/- VIDE ORDER DATED 25.3.2011. 3. THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A) AND AFTER CONSIDERING WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY ASSESSEE LD. CIT(A), A FTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL FILED BY ASSESS EE, IN WHICH IT WAS CLAIMED THAT IT PAID THE DUE TAX IN TIME, DIRECTED THE ITO(TDS) TO MAKE FACTUAL VERIFICATION AND PASS SUITABLE ORDER. THE A SSESSEE WAS ALSO DIRECTED TO COOPERATE WITH THE ITO(TDS). 4. BEING AGGRIEVED WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) THE DEPARTMENT IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS FILED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL: L. THE LD. CIT (APPEAL), BAREILLY HAS ERRED IN FACT S AND LAW BY ACCEPTING NEW EVIDENCE FROM THE DEDUCTOR WITHOUT ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO IN TERMS OF RULE 4 6A (3) OF THE IT RULES1962. THE DEDUCTOR SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIT (A) THAT HE HAS DEDUCTED AND PAID THE DUE TAX AND THAT SHORT DEDUCTION/ NON-PAYMENT IS DUE TO MISMATCH. THIS FAC T WAS NEITHER PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO NOR IT WAS REFLECTED ON THE ITD SYSTEM WHEN THIS ORDER U/S 201(1)/201 (1A) WAS PA S ED. THE CIT (A) HAS ERRONEOUSLY ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF ASSES SEE AND DIRECTED THE AO TO VERIFY THE CLAIM BY CALLING FOR NECESSARY 3 ITA 2776/DEL/2014 DOCUMENTS FOR REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND REVISE THE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 2. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO CALL FOR NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND R EVISE THE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE PROCESSING OF TDS STATEMENTS ARE FULLY CENTRALIZED AT CPC (TDS) VAISHALI GHAZIABAD AND THE AO HAS NO POWER TO REVISE THE ORDER. THE ONLY REMEDY FOR T HE DEDUCTOR IS TO FILE CORRECTION STATEMENTS ON-LINE AND GET TH E DEMAND REDUCED THROUGH CPC(TDS). 3. THE CIT(A) BEING A QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY HAS ERRED FURTHER IN DIRECTING THE AO(TDS) TO CARRY OUT RECTIFICATION S WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS OF RECTIFICATION/CORRECTI ONS LAID DOWN BY CPC(TDS). NO PROOF HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY TH E DEDUCTOR BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO SHOW THAT THE NECESSA RY CORRECTION STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN FILED WITH CPC(TDS) . BEING A PERSON FROM THE DEPARTMENT, THE CIT(A) IS REQUIRED TO UNDERSTAND ACTUAL PROCESSES LAID DOWN BY THE DEPART MENT AND WHETHER DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY HIM ARE EXECUTABLE OR NOT. 4. BY DOING SO IN 1,2,3 ABOVE,' THE CIT(A) HAS MECH ANICALLY DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL, WHILE NO IMPLEMENTATION OF HIS DIRECTIONS ARE POSSIBLE AT A.O. (TDS) END. IN CASE OF MISMATCH, THE REMEDY LIES IN FILING OF CORRECTION STATEMENT W HICH ARE AUTOMATICALLY PROCESSED BY THE CPC (TDS). TILL CORR ECTION STATEMENT IS PROCESSED, THE AO(TDS) ORDER STANDS, A ND CANNOT BE CANCELLED. 5. THAT THE APPLICANT CRAVES LEAVE TO AMEND/ADD ANY ONE OR MORE OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL AS STATED ABOVE AS AN D WHEN NEED FOR DOING SO MAY ARISE. 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR AND DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) BE CAUSE HE HAS MERELY 4 ITA 2776/DEL/2014 DIRECTED THE ITO(TDS) TO DO THE NEEDFUL AFTER VERIF ICATION OF THE ASSESSEES PLEA THAT FULL COMPLIANCE HAS BEEN MADE IN REGARD T O TDS AND THE TAX HAS BEEN DULY DEPOSITED. ACCORDINGLY, REVENUES APPEAL HAS NO FORCE AND IS LIABLE TO BE DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES APPEAL STANDS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCEMENT IN OPEN COURT ON 14/06/2016. SD/- (S.V. MEHROTRA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED:14/06/2016. *MP* COPY OF ORDER TO: 1. ASSESSEE 2. AO 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.