M/s. Lanco Infratech Ltd., Gurgaon V. ACIT, Ghaziabad

ITA 363/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 107 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6471 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 7 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-09-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 23-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GAURAV PUNDIR
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 153

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. K. N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA NO. 363/DEL/2017 : ASSTT. YEAR : 2012-13 LANCO INFRATECH LTD., LANCO HOUSE, PLOT NO. 397, UDYOG VIHAR, PHASE-3, GURGAON-122016 VS ACIT, CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO. A AA CL3449H ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SH. GAURAV PUNDIR, SR. DR DATE OF HEAR ING: 08 . 0 9 .20 2 1 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 08 .0 9 .20 2 1 ORDER PER DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-41, NEW DELHI DATED 15.11. 2016. 2. FOLLOWING GROUNDS HAVE BEEN RAISED BY THE ASSESS EE: 1. THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN UPHOLDING THE DEMAND OF INTEREST OF RS. 16,67,307/- AS PAYABLE BY THE ASSES SEE ON ALLEGED DELAYED PAYMENT OF TDS MADE BY ASSESSEE. 2. THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, INTEREST COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISION OF SECTION 201(1)/201(1A) IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. ITA NO.363/DEL/2017 LANCO INFRATECH LTD. 2 3. THAT THE ACIT HAS WRONGLY AND ILLEGALLY PASSED T HE ORDER WHILE CONSIDERING THE DATE OF CHALLAN AS THE DATE OF DEPOSIT AND NOT CONSIDERING THE DATE ON WHICH TH E AMOUNT WAS DEBITED FROM THE BANK ACCOUNT WITH AUTHORIZED BANK. THE CIT(A) HAS ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THE SAME. 4. THAT THE ACIT HAS WRONGLY AND ILLEGALLY CHARGED INTEREST FOR TWO MONTHS ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED DELAY IN DEPOSIT OF TDS. THE CIT(A) HAS ALSO ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN UPHOLDING THE SAME. 5. THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THE CONNOTATION OF EVERY MONTH OR PAR T THEREOF APPEARING IN SECTION 201(1A) MEAN EVERY CALENDAR MONTH OR PART THEREOF, IGNORING THAT IT AS A PERIOD OF ONE MONTH OR PART THEREOF. 6. THAT THE ACIT AND CIT(A) ERRED IN LAW AND FACT I N NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE EXPRESSION 'MONTH' REFERS TO A MONTH RECKONED ACCORDING TO THE BRITISH CALENDAR ' (EMPHASIS SUPPLIED). A MONTH AS PER BRITISH CALEND AR' AND 'A MONTH RECKONED AS PER BRITISH CALENDAR' ARE NOT THE SAME THING AND CANNOT BE USED INTERCHANGEABLY. WHILE THE FORMER REFERS TO A CALENDAR MONTH BY ITSE LF, THE LATER REFERS TO A PERIOD OF TIME WHICH QUALIFIE D TO BE TREATED AS A 'MONTH'. 7. THAT THE INTEREST U/S 220(2) IS ILLEGALLY AND WR ONGLY CHARGED AND ALSO WRONGLY WORKED OUT. 8. THAT WITHOUT PREJUDICE THERE IS NO DELAY IN PAYM ENT AS THE AMOUNT WAS PAID IN TIME AND THE PROCESSING DONE BY THE RECOVERY BANK ON THE NEXT DATE CANNOT B E TREATED AS DELAY BY THE APPELLANT. 9. THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TH E CASE, THE ORDER PASSED BY THE CIT(A) IS INCORRECT A ND PERVERSE AS SAME IS NOT BASED ON CORRECT FACTS AND ALSO NOT BASED ON CORRECT LEGAL POSITION. ITA NO.363/DEL/2017 LANCO INFRATECH LTD. 3 3. THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINES S OF EPC AND CONSTRUCTION INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT AND POW ER GENERATION. 4. ORDER U/S 153 HAS BEEN ISSUED BY THE CPC (TDS) C HARGING INTEREST ON LATE PAYMENT OF THE TDS U/S 201(1A). TH E LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ORDER OF THE CPC. 5. THE RELEVANT UNDISPUTED FACTS OF THE CASE ARE TH AT THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED CHEQUE ON 30.04.2012 WHICH HAS B EEN CLEARED AND THE AMOUNT HAS BEEN DEBITED ON 30.04.20 12 ITSELF FROM THE ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WHEREAS THE CHALLA N GENERATED BY THE BANK REFLECTED DATE OF DEPOSIT AS ON 01.05.2 012 WHICH SPINNED OFF THE CHARGING OF INTEREST BY THE CPC. THE ASSESSEE HAS PRODUCED CERTIFICATE FROM THE INDIAN OVERSEAS B ANK, SECUNDERABAD BRANCH CONFIRMING THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S DEPOSITED THE AMOUNTS THROUGH INTERNET BANKING FACI LITY (IBF) OF THE BANK ON 30.04.2012 AND AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN DEBITE D ON THE SAME DATE. IT WAS A TECHNICAL ERROR ON THE PART OF THE BANK TO REFLECT THE AMOUNT ON 01.05.2012 INSTEAD OF 30.04.2 012 FOR WHICH WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE CANNOT BE HELD TO B E RESPONSIBLE. WE ARE ALSO GUIDED BY THE CIRCULAR OF CBDT NO. 1197 WITH REGARD TO THE SECTION 211, ADVANCE TAX WH ERE IN IN CASE OF BANK HOLIDAY , THE AMOUNTS WERE ALLOWED TO BE PAID ON THE NEXT DAY OF THE DUE DATE WITHOUT INTEREST. IN T HE INSTANT CASE, THE MATTER PERTAINING TO SECTION 201, THE ASS ESSEE HAS ITA NO.363/DEL/2017 LANCO INFRATECH LTD. 4 RIGHTLY DEPOSITED THE TDS AMOUNT ON 30.04.2012. HEN CE, WE HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LIABLE TO PAY ANY INT EREST U/S 201(1A). 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 08/09/2021. SD/- SD/- (K. N. CHARY) (DR. B. R. R. KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER AC COUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 08/09/2021 *SUBODH KUMAR, SR. PS* COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR DATE INITIAL 1. DRAFT PUNCHED ON COMPUTER 09.09.2021 PS 2. DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 09.09.2021 PS 3. DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM