ITO, Jaipur V. LIC OF INDIA, Jaipur

ITA 371/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 37123114 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-07-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 09-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DILIP SHARMA
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; ,OA JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JM & SHRI T.R. MEENA, AM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NOS. 371 TO 373/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09 INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS(3), JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S LIC OF INDIA, JEEVAN JYOTI, STATION ROAD, SAMBER LAKE, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: TAN NO. JPRL01411E VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 389/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS(3), JAIPUR. CUKE VS. M/S LIC OF INDIA, BRANCH SIKAR, JEEVAN JYOTI, BEHIND COLLECTORATE, SIKAR (RAJ.) LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: TAN NO. JPRL01426F VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI DILIP SHARMA (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : NONE. LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 22/07/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24/07/2015 ITA 371 TO 373 & 389/JP/2013_ ITO (TDS) VS. LIC OF INDIA 2 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER: R.P. TOLANI, J.M. THESE ARE FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE ARISING OUT OF THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS DATED 30/01/2013 PASSED BY THE LE ARNED CIT(A)-III, JAIPUR FOR A.Y. 2008-09 AND 2009-10. THE SOLE COMMO N GROUND OF ALL THE APPEALS IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER:- THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN NOT DIRECTING THE DEFAUL TER ASSESSEE FOR FILING CORRECTION STATEMENT DUE TO WHIC H THE DEMAND IS STILL OUTSTANDING IN THE SYSTEM AND WITHOU T DOING THAT ASKING THE A.O. TO RECOMPUTED THE DEMAND AFTER ALLOWING CREDIT OF TAX DEPOSITED BY THE DEDUCT OR WHICH THE A.O. CANNOT DO. 2. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEES IN QUESTION ARE LIC BRANCHES OF TWO DIFFERENT PLACES IN RAJASTHAN, WHO HAVE DULY P AID TDS DEDUCTION @ 10.3% U/S 194D OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHOR T THE ACT) ON THE PAYMENTS OF COMMISSION MADE TO LIC AGENTS. THE TD S AUTHORITIES, HOWEVER, WRONGLY COMPUTED THE TDS @ 30.9% AND TREATED T HE ASSESSEES IN DEFAULT ON DIFFERENTIAL AMOUNT AND RAI SED RELEVANT DEMAND U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF THE ACT. ITA 371 TO 373 & 389/JP/2013_ ITO (TDS) VS. LIC OF INDIA 3 3. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEES PREFERRED FIRST APPEAL WHERE THE LD CIT(A) HELD THAT TDS AMOUNTS DEDUCTED AND PAID BY THE ASSESSEES WERE CORRECT AND DECIDED THE APPEAL IN FAVOR OF THE ASSESSEE BY ISSUING FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS TO LD. AO. I HAVE DULY CONSIDERED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON R ECORD. I AGREE WITH THE LD AR THAT TAX WAS DEDUCTIBLE ONLY @ 10.3% U/ S 194D AND NOT @ 30.9% AS COMPUTED BY ITO, TDS. HE IS DIRECTE D TO RECOMPUTED THE TDS @ 10.3% ON THE COMMISSION PAID BY THE APPELLANT. HE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO GIVE CREDIT OF TH E TAX DEPOSITED OF RS. 588/- AFTER DUE VERIFICATION. 4. AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEALS BEFORE US R AISING THE ABOVE GROUND THAT THE DEMAND IS OUTSTANDING IN THE COMPUT ER SYSTEM, THEREFORE, THE LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN DIRECTI NG THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECOMPUTED THE PAYMENT AFTER ALLOWING THE CREDIT OF TAX DEPOSITED. 5. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN ALL T HE CASES. 6. THE LD DR IS HEARD. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. IN OU R CONSIDERED VIEW AS AN APPELLATE AUTHORITY LD CIT(A) HAS TO DECIDE THE G ROUNDS AS RAISED IN ITA 371 TO 373 & 389/JP/2013_ ITO (TDS) VS. LIC OF INDIA 4 MEMO OF APPEAL, WHICH HAS BEEN DULY DECIDED. MERELY BECAUSE THE DEMAND IS OUTSTANDING IN COMPUTER SYSTEM CANNOT IMP INGE ON THE ORDER OF THE LD CIT(A) IN ANY MANNER. IN OUR VIEW, T HE APPEALS IN QUESTION ARE NOT MAINTAINABLE U/S 246, HENCE DISMIS SED ACCORDINGLY. 8. IN THE RESULTS, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE A RE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24/07/2015. SD/- SD/- VH-VKJ-EHUK VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (T.R. MEENA) (R.P.TOLANI) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 24 TH JULY, 2015 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- THE ITO, TDS(3), JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- M/S LIC OF INDIA , JAIPUR/SIKAR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 371 TO 373 & 389/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR