Simandhar Corporation, Surat V. The Income Tax Officer, TDS-2, Surat

ITA 3369/AHD/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 94595 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 15-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-12-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: PRADIP KR MAJUMDAR
• Keywords: Charitable institution

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD A BENCH BEFORE: S H RI ANIL CHATURVEDI , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHR I S. S. GODARA , JUDICIAL MEMBER VIJAYSINH MANSINH MANGRO BA LA, DHULIA NATIONAL HIGHWAY - 6, FORT - SONGADH, TAPI - 3955001 PAN: ABPPM8699F (APPELLANT) VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 2, SURAT (RESPONDENT) SUVIDHI CORPORATION, 324, SIMANDHAR CAMPUS, OPP. SOMCHINTAMANI COMPLEX, PAL, SURAT - 395009 PAN:ABUFS0929F (APPELLANT) VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 2, SURAT (RESPONDENT) I T A NO . 3360 / A HD/20 14 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 ITA NO. 3362/ AHD/20 14 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 ITA NO S . 3363 - 64/ AHD/20 14 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14 I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 2 SUVIDHI CORPORATION, 324, SIMANDHAR CAMPUS, OPP. SOMCHINTAMANI COMPLEX, PAL, SURAT - 395009 PAN:ABUFS0929F (APPELLANT) VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 2, SURAT (RESPONDENT) M/S. SIMANDHAR CORPORATION, BLOCK NO. 363, F.P. NO. 88, T.P. 14, PAL, SURAT - 395009 PAN: ABQFS6907B (APPELLANT) VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 2, SURAT (RESPONDENT) SHREE MARUDHAR CORPORATION, TP SCHEME, 14, FINAL PLOT NO. 24 NEAR BHARTI RESIDENCY, PAL, SURAT - 395009 PAN: ACDFS6421L (APPELLANT) VS INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS - 2, SURAT (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : S H RI PRADIP KR. MAJUMDAR , SR. D . R. ASSESSEE BY: NONE ITA NO. 3369 / AHD/20 14 A SSESS MENT YEAR 2013 - 14 ITA NO S. 3371 - 72 / AHD/20 14 A SSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 1 4 I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 3 DATE OF HEARING : 15 - 10 - 2 015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16 - 10 - 2 015 / ORDER P ER BENCH: - THESE SIX APPE ALS FILED AT DIFFERENT ASSESSEE S BEHE ST FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013 - 14, ARISE FROM SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) - IV , SURA T IN CASE NOS. CAS - IV/119,135,133, 134, 146, 128 & 127 /13 - 14 DATED 29 - 09 - 2014 UPHOLDING LEVY OF LATE FI LING FEES AMOUNTING TO RS. 9,620/ - , RS. 74,210/ - RS. 15,320/ - , RS. 24,2 60/ - , RS. 20,480/ - , RS. 19,170/ - AND RS. 14,580/ - RESPECTIVELY, IN PROCEEDING S U/S. 234 E OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 IN SHORT THE ACT . 2. WE NOTICE AT THE OUTSET THAT THE SOLITARY ISSUE AS RAISED IN ALL THESE A PPEALS IS THAT OF SECTION 234E LEVY ARISI NG FROM LATE FILING FEES. WE NOTICE THAT A CO - ORDINATE BENCH DECISION IN ITAS NOS 3274 TO 3276/AHD/2014 LIONS CLUB OF NORTH SURAT CHARITABLE TRUST VS. ITO DECIDED ON 03 - 09 - 2015 HOLDS THE IMPUGNED FEE TO BE NOT LEVIABLE BEFORE 01 - 06 - 2015 AS UNDER: - I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 4 2. ALT HOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 16 GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN ALL THESE THREE APPEALS, THE SHORT GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE LEVY OF LATE FILING FEES IN THE COURS E OF PROCESSING TDS RETURN UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE ACT. 3. NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE BUT I HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICABLE LEGA L POSITION. 4. I FIND THAT THE ISSUE IN ALL THESE APPEALS IS NOW SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF ITAT AMRITSAR BENCH IN THE CASE OF SIBIA HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. DCIT - ITA NO.90/ASR/2015, VIDE ORDER DATED 9 TH JUNE, 201 5, WHEREIN THE DIVISION BENCH HAS INTER ALIA OBSERVED AS UNDER : - 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. IN ADDITION TO HIS ARGUMENT ON T HE MERITS, LEARNED COUNSEL HAS ALSO INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE REPORTS ABOUT THE DECISIONS OF VARIOUS HON BLE HIGH COURTS, INCLUDING HON BLE KERALA HIGH COURT, IN THE CASE OF NARATH MAPILA LP SCHOOL VS UNION OF INDIA [WP (C) 31498/2013(J)], HON BLE KARAN ATAKA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF ADITHYA BIZOR P SOLUTIONS VS UNION OF INDIA [WP NO. 6918 - 6938/2014(T - IT), HON BLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF OM PRAKASH DHOOT VS UNION OF INDIA [WP NO. 1981 OF 2014] AND OF HON BLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF R ASHMIKANT KUNDALIA VS UNION OF INDIA [WP NO. 771 OF 2014], GRANTING STAY ON THE DEMANDS RAISED IN RESPECT OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234E. THE FULL TEXT OF THESE DECISIONS WERE NOT PRODUCED BEFORE US. HOWEVER, AS ADMITTEDLY THERE ARE NO ORDERS FROM THE HON BLE COURTS ABOVE RETRAINING US FROM OUR ADJUDICATION ON MERITS IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL, AND AS, IN OUR HUMBLE UNDERSTANDING, THIS APPEAL REQUIRES ADJUDICATION ON A VERY SHORT LEGAL ISSUE, WITHIN A NARROW COMPASS OF MATERIAL I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 5 FACTS, WE ARE PROCEE DING TO DISPOSE OF THIS APPEAL ON MERITS. 5. WE MAY PRODUCE, FOR READY REFERENCE, SECTION 234E OF THE ACT, WHICH WAS INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT 2012 AND WAS BROUGHT INTO EFFECT FROM 1ST JULY 2012. THIS STATUTORY PROVISION IS AS FOLLOWS: 234E. FEE FOR DEFAULTS IN FURNISHING STATEMENTS (1) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, WHERE A PERSON FAILS TO DELIVER OR CAUSE TO BE DELIVERED A STATEMENT WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED IN SUB - SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR THE PROVISO TO SUBSECTION (3) OF SEC TION 206C, HE SHALL BE LIABLE TO PAY, BY WAY OF FEE, A SUM OF TWO HUNDRED RUPEES FOR EVERY DAY DURING WHICH THE FAILURE CONTINUES. (2) THE AMOUNT OF FEE REFERRED TO IN SUB - SECTION (1) SHALL NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF TAX DEDUCTIBLE OR COLLECTIBLE, AS THE CA SE MAY BE. (3) THE AMOUNT OF FEE REFERRED TO IN SUB - SECTION (1) SHALL BE PAID BEFORE DELIVERING OR CAUSING TO BE DELIVERED A STATEMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUB - SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR THE PROVISO TO SUB - SECTION (3) OF SECTION 206C. (4) THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL APPLY TO A STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN SUB - SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR THE PROVISO TO SUB - SECTION (3) OF SECTION 206C WHICH IS TO BE DELIVERED OR CAUSED TO BE DELIVERED FOR TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE OR TAX COLLECTED AT SOURCE, AS THE CAS E MAY BE, ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2012. 6. WE MAY ALSO REPRODUCE THE SECTION 200A WHICH WAS INSERTED BY THE FINANCE ACT 2009 WITH EFFECT FROM 1ST I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 6 APRIL 2010. THIS STATUTORY PROVISION, AS IT STOOD AT THE RELEVANT POINT OF TIME, WAS AS FOLLOWS: 2 00A: PROCESSING OF STATEMENTS OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE (1) WHERE A STATEMENT OF TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE, OR A CORRECTION STATEMENT, HAS BEEN MADE BY A PERSON DEDUCTING ANY SUM (HEREAFTER REFERRED TO IN THIS SECTION AS DEDUCTOR) UNDER SECTION 200, SUCH ST ATEMENT SHALL BE PROCESSED IN THE FOLLOWING MANNER, NAMELY: (A) THE SUMS DEDUCTIBLE UNDER THIS CHAPTER SHALL BE COMPUTED AFTER MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS, NAMELY: (I) ANY ARITHMETICAL ERROR IN THE STATEMENT; OR (II) AN INCORRECT CLAIM, APPARENT FROM ANY INFORMATION IN THE STATEMENT; (B) THE INTEREST, IF ANY, SHALL BE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE SUMS DEDUCTIBLE AS COMPUTED IN THE STATEMENT; (C) THE SUM PAYABLE BY, OR THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO, THE DEDUCTOR SHALL BE DETERMINED AFTER ADJUSTMENT OF AMOUNT COMPUTED UNDER CLAUSE (B) AGAINST ANY AMOUNT PAID UNDER SECTION 200 AND SECTION 201, AND ANY AMOUNT PAID OTHERWISE BY WAY OF TAX OR INTEREST; (D) AN INTIMATION SHALL BE PREPARED OR GENERATED AND SENT TO THE DEDUCTOR SPECIFYING THE SUM DETERMINE D TO BE PAYABLE BY, OR THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO, HIM UNDER CLAUSE (C); AND (E) THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO THE DEDUCTOR IN PURSUANCE OF THE DETERMINATION UNDER CLAUSE (C) SHALL BE GRANTED TO THE DEDUCTOR: I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 7 PROVIDED THAT NO INTIMATION UNDER THIS SUB - SEC TION SHALL BE SENT AFTER THE EXPIRY OF ONE YEAR FROM THE END OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE STATEMENT IS FILED. EXPLANATION : FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS SUB - SECTION, 'AN INCORRECT CLAIM APPARENT FROM ANY INFORMATION IN THE STATEMENT' SHALL MEAN A CLAI M, ON THE BASIS OF AN ENTRY, IN THE STATEMENT (I) OF AN ITEM, WHICH IS INCONSISTENT WITH ANOTHER ENTRY OF THE SAME OR SOME OTHER ITEM IN SUCH STATEMENT; (II) IN RESPECT OF RATE OF DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE, WHERE SUCH RATE IS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT; (2) FOR THE PURPOSES OF PROCESSING OF STATEMENTS UNDER SUB - SECTION (1), THE BOARD MAY MAKE A SCHEME FOR CENTRALISED PROCESSING OF STATEMENTS OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE TO EXPEDITIOUSLY DETERMINE THE TAX PAYABLE BY, OR THE REFUND DU E TO, THE DEDUCTOR AS REQUIRED UNDER THE SAID SUBSECTION. 7. BY WAY OF FINANCE ACT 2015, AND WITH EFFECT FROM 1ST JUNE 2015, THERE IS AN AMENDMENT IN SECTION 200A AND THIS AMENDMENT, AS STATED IN THE FINANCE ACT 2015, IS AS FOLLOWS: IN SECTION 200A OF TH E INCOME - TAX ACT, IN SUB - SECTION (1), FOR CLAUSES (C) TO (E), THE FOLLOWING CLAUSES SHALL BE SUBSTITUTED WITH EFFECT FROM THE 1 ST DAY OF JUNE, 2015, NAMELY: (C) THE FEE, IF ANY, SHALL BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E; (D) T HE SUM PAYABLE BY, OR THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO, THE DEDUCTOR SHALL BE DETERMINED AFTER ADJUSTMENT I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 8 OF THE AMOUNT COMPUTED UNDER CLAUSE (B) AND CLAUSE (C) AGAINST ANY AMOUNT PAID UNDER SECTION 200 OR SECTION 201 OR SECTION 234E AND ANY AMOUNT PAID OTHERWI SE BY WAY OF TAX OR INTEREST OR FEE; (E) AN INTIMATION SHALL BE PREPARED OR GENERATED AND SENT TO THE DEDUCTOR SPECIFYING THE SUM DETERMINED TO BE PAYABLE BY, OR THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO, HIM UNDER CLAUSE (D); AND (F) THE AMOUNT OF REFUND DUE TO THE D EDUCTOR IN PURSUANCE OF THE DETERMINATION UNDER CLAUSE (D) SHALL BE GRANTED TO THE DEDUCTOR. 8. IN EFFECT THUS, POST 1ST JUNE 2015, IN THE COURSE OF PROCESSING OF A TDS STATEMENT AND ISSUANCE OF INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A IN RESPECT THEREOF, AN ADJUST MENT COULD ALSO BE MADE IN RESPECT OF THE FEE, IF ANY, SHALL BE COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E . THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT WHAT IS IMPUGNED IN APPEAL BEFORE US IS THE INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE ACT, AS STATED IN SO MAN Y WORDS IN THE IMPUGNED INTIMATION ITSELF, AND, AS THE LAW STOOD, PRIOR TO 1ST JUNE 2015, THERE WAS NO ENABLING PROVISION THEREIN FOR RAISING A DEMAND IN RESPECT OF LEVY OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234E. WHILE EXAMINING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE INTIMATION UNDER SE CTION 200A, WE HAVE TO BE GUIDED BY THE LIMITED MANDATE OF SECTION 200A, WHICH, AT THE RELEVANT POINT OF TIME, PERMITTED COMPUTATION OF AMOUNT RECOVERABLE FROM, OR PAYABLE TO, THE TAX DEDUCTOR AFTER MAKING THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS: (A). AFTER MAKING ADJU STMENT ON ACCOUNT OF ARITHMETICAL ERRORS AND INCORRECT CLAIMS APPARENT FROM ANY INFORMATION IN THE STATEMENT - SECTION 200A(1)(A) I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 9 (B). AFTER MAKING ADJUSTMENT FOR INTEREST, IF ANY, COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF SUMS DEDUCTIBLE AS COMPUTED IN THE STATEMENT . - SECTION 200A(1)(B) 9. NO OTHER ADJUSTMENTS IN THE AMOUNT REFUNDABLE TO, OR RECOVERABLE FROM, THE TAX DEDUCTOR, WERE PERMISSIBLE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AS IT EXISTED AT THAT POINT OF TIME. 10. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSIONS, IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW, THE ADJUSTMENT IN RESPECT OF LEVY OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234E WAS INDEED BEYOND THE SCOPE OF PERMISSIBLE ADJUSTMENTS CONTEMPLATED UNDER SECTION 200A. THIS INTIMATION IS AN APPEALABLE ORDER UNDER SECTION 246A(A), AND, THEREFORE, THE CIT(A) OUGHT TO HA VE EXAMINED LEGALITY OF THE ADJUSTMENT MADE UNDER THIS INTIMATION IN THE LIGHT OF THE SCOPE OF THE SECTION 200A. LEARNED CIT(A) HAS NOT DONE SO. HE HAS JUSTIFIED THE LEVY OF FEES ON THE BASIS OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 234E. THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE HERE. T HE ISSUE IS WHETHER SUCH A LEVY COULD BE EFFECTED IN THE COURSE OF INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A. THE ANSWER IS CLEARLY IN NEGATIVE. NO OTHER PROVISION ENABLING A DEMAND IN RESPECT OF THIS LEVY HAS BEEN POINTED OUT TO US AND IT IS THUS AN ADMITTED POSITION THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ENABLING PROVISION UNDER SECTION 200A, NO SUCH LEVY COULD BE EFFECTED. AS INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A, RAISING A DEMAND OR DIRECTING A REFUND TO THE TAX DEDUCTOR, CAN ONLY BE PASSED WITHIN ONE YEAR FROM THE END OF THE FINANCIA L YEAR WITHIN WHICH THE RELATED TDS STATEMENT IS FILED, AND AS THE RELATED TDS STATEMENT WAS FILED ON 19TH FEBRUARY 2014, SUCH A LEVY COULD ONLY HAVE BEEN MADE AT BEST WITHIN 31ST MARCH 2015. THAT TIME HAS ALREADY ELAPSED AND THE DEFECT IS THUS NOT CURABLE EVEN AT THIS STAGE. IN VIEW OF THESE DISCUSSIONS, AS ALSO BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, THE IMPUGNED LEVY OF FEES UNDER SECTION 234 E IS UNSUSTAINABLE IN LAW. WE, THEREFORE, UPHOLD THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETE THE IMPUGNED LEVY OF FEE I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 10 UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE GETS THE RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. 5. WHEN THE ABOVE JUDICIAL PRECEDENT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, HE DID NOT HAVE MUCH TO SAY EXCEPT TO PLACE HIS RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. HE FAIRLY DID NOT DISPUTE THAT THE PROVISIONS ACCEPTING LEVY OF LATE FILING FEES UNDER SECTION 234E HAVE INDEED BEEN BROUGHT TO THE STATUTE W.E.F. 1 ST JUNE,, 2015 AND THE IMPUGNED ORDER WAS PASSED MUCH BEFORE THAT DATE. 6. IN VIEW OF TH E ABOVE DISCUSSIONS AND BEARING IN MIND ENTIRETY OF THE CASE, I HEREBY DELETE THE LEVY OF LATE FILING FEES IN ALL THESE THREE APPEALS UNDER SECTION 234E OF THE ACT BY WAY OF IMPUGNED INTIMATION ISSUED. THE ASSESSEE GETS THE RELIEF ACCORDINGLY. THE REVE NUE FAILS TO POINT OUT ANY DISTINCTION ON FACTS OR LAW. WE ACCEPT ASSESSEES ARGUMENTS ON THIS LEGAL SCORE ALONE AND DELETE THE IMPUGNED LATE FILING FEES U/S. 234E OF THE ACT IN QUESTION. 4. THESE ASS ESSEES SIX APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. ORD ER PR ONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 16 - 10 - 2015 SD/ - SD/ - ( ANIL CHATURVEDI ) ( S. S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD : DATED 16 /10 /2015 AK I.T.A NO. ITA NO. 3360, 3362, 3363 - 64 ,3369,3371 - 72 /AHD/201 4 A.Y 2013 - 14 PAGE NO DIFFERENT ASSESSEES VS. ITO 11 / COPY OF ORDER FORWARDE D TO: - 1. ASSESSEE 2. REVENUE 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER/ , / ,