ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Relaxo Footware Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4093/DEL/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 409320114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 1 month(s) 30 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Next Hearing Date: 10-07-2014
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 31-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAMEER SHARMA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 154

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH F : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.S.KAPOOR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 4093 /DEL/20 1 2 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 0 - 11 ACIT VS. RE LAXO FOOTWARE LTD., CIRCLE - 51(1),ROOM NO. 508, 316 - 319, ALLIED HOUSE, INDERLOK AAYAKAR BHAWAN, LAXMI NAGAR NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPO NDENT) ITA N O. 4094 /DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 ACIT, VS. RELAXO FOOTWARE LTD., CIRCLE - 51(1), ROOM NO. 508, 316 - 319, ALLIED H OUSE, INDERLOK AAYAKAR BHAWAN, LAXMI NAGAR NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDE NT) ITA NO.409 5 /DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 ACIT, VS. RELAXO FOOTWARE LTD., CIRCLE - 51(1), ROOM NO. 508, 316 - 319, ALLIED HOU SE, INDERLOK AAYAKAR BHAWAN, LAXMI NAGAR NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO. 4093,4094,4095,4096/DEL/2012 2 ITA NO.409 6 / DEL/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010 - 11 ACIT, VS. RELAXO FOOTWARE LTD., CIRCLE - 51(1), ROOM NO. 508, 316 - 319, ALLIED HOUSE, INDERLOK AAYAKAR BHAWAN, LAXMI NAGAR NEW DELHI NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) A PPELLANT BY : SH. SHAMEER SHARMA, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY : SH. O.P.DUA, SR. ADV ALONGWITH RAJIV RANJAN PRASAD, ADV. O R D E R PER I.C. SUDHIR, J.M. IN ALL THESE CASES THE REVENUE HAS QUESTIONED FIRST APPELLATE ORDER ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE HOLDIN G THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE A SSESSING O FFICER U/S 200A AS NOT APPEALABLE BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY U/S 246A OF THE ACT HAS ERRED IN GIVING DIRECTION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTI ON TO R ATIFY THE MISTAKES IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 200A OF THE ACT. 2. WHILE RE ITERAT ING THE CONTENTS OF THE GROUND THE LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT U/S 200A, T HE AO IS NOT ALLOW ED TO MAKE ANY CORRECTION IN THE E - TDS RETURNS FILED BY THE DEDUCTOR ASSESSEE. UNDER THE SAID PROVISION, THE AO HAS GOT VERY LIMITED POWERS TO MODIFY THE DATA IN THE E - TDS RETURNS TO WHICH DEDUCTOR ASSESSEE IS NOT AUTHORIZED. ITA NO. 4093,4094,4095,4096/DEL/2012 3 3. THE LD. AR POINTED OUT THAT THE ISSUE RAISED IN THE GROUNDS IS COVERED BY THE ORDER DATED 1.10.2012 OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 4028,4049/D/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010 - 11 AND 2011 - 12 ) IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. UNITECH WIRELESS, TAMIL NADU PVT. LTD. AND ORS. 4. HAVING GONE THROUGH THE ABOVE CITED ORDERS, WE FIND THAT THE ISSU E RAISED HAS BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE ABOVE NAMED CASES. THE RELEVANT PARAGRAPHS THEREOF IS BEING REPRODUCED THEREUNDER. PER BENCH THIS BUNCH OF 25 APPEALS IS BY THE REVENUE, CHALLENGING SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INC OME TAX (A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS PERVERSE AND ERRONEOUS ON FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. 2. THE DEPARTMENT HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 4 GROUNDS IN THESE APPEALS TO CHALLENGE THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) IN HOL DING THAT THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 200A OF THE ACT WAS NOT APPEALABLE U/S. 246A AND ON THE OTHER HAND DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO TAKE CORRECTIVE ACTION TO RECTIFY THE MISTAKES IN THE ORDER WITHIN TWO MONTHS. DURING THE HEARING, IN SOME CASES, AS MENTIONED IN CAPTION OF APPEALS, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. SINCE, ISSUES ARE INVOLVED FOR ADJUDICATION IN ALL THESE APPEALS IS COMMON, THEREFORE, THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON O RDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVES, WHO ADVANCED THEIR ARGUMENTS WHICH ARE IDENTICAL TO THE GROUNDS RAISED BY SUBMITTING THAT THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) ERRED IN GRANTING DIRECTIONS TO TH E ASSESSING OFFICER AND FURTHER ERRED IN FIXING TIME LIMIT OF TWO MONTHS FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. COUNSELS FOR THE ASSESSEE AS APPLICABLE TO THE RESPECTIVE APPEALS, DEFENDED THE IMPUGN ED ORDER BY SUBMITTING THAT EVEN IF THE APPEAL IS NOT FILED, STILL THERE IS NO GRIEVANCE TO THE REVENUE. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BEFORE COMING TO A COMMON CONCLUSION, WE ARE REPRODUCING HER EUNDER THE RELEVANT PORTION FROM THE IMPUGNED ORDER : - ITA NO. 4093,4094,4095,4096/DEL/2012 4 THE ABOVE APPEALS ARE FILED BY THE APPELLANTS U/S 200A OF THE I.T.ACT IN THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011 - 12 AGAINST THE COMPUTERIZED PROCESSING ORDER OF AO (TDS) WHERE TAX AND INTEREST U/S 200A HAVE BEEN COMP UTED IN THE COMPUTER FOR SHORT DEDUCTION/SHORT PAYMENT/LATE PAYMENT BY THE APPELLANT. THERE IS NO APPEAL PROVISION U/S 246AOF THE I.T.ACT FOR FILING APPEALS AGAINST ORDER U/S 200A OF THE I.T.ACT. THE APPELLANTS ARE ADVISED TO FILE NECESSARY CORRECTIONS STA TEMENTS BEFORE THE AO (TDS), COORDINATE AND COOPERATE WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND RECTIFY THE ORDER U/S 200A/154 OF THE I.T.ACT WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND AFTER RECTIFICATION, PAY THE TAX AND INTEREST IF ANY, AFTER RECTIFICATION. THE AO(TDS) SHOULD GIVE APPEAL EFFECT TO THESE ORDERS WITHIN 2 MONTHS OF RECEIPT OF THE ORDER IMMEDIATELY BY ISSUING NECESSARY NOTICES U/S 154 OF THE ACT TO THE APPELLANT AND RECTIFYING THE ORDERS AS PER LAW. IF THE RECTIFICATION IS NOT POSSIBLE IN COMPUTER, THE ASSESSING O FFICER SHOULD MANUALLY RECTIFY BY PASSING SUITABLE ORDER IN A FORMAT SO THAT A MASS RECTIFICATION CAN BE COMPLETED QUICKLY. THE AO(TDS) SHOULD GIVE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT BEFORE RECTIFYING THESE ORDERS AND LISTENING TO THE GRIEVANCES O F THE APPELLANT. 6. IF THE OBSERVATION MADE IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS ARE ANALYZED, THERE IS DIRECTION/ADVICE BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) TO FILE CORRECT STATEMENT BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER (TDS), AFTER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE REVENUE SHOULD NOT FEEL AGGRIEVED, AS THE ULTIMATE PURPOSE IS TO DO JUSTICE. EVEN OTHERWISE, NO PERSON SHOULD BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD AND THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A) HAS MERELY REMANDED THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER, THEREFORE, THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER, THE SAME IS UPHELD. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFT ER PROVIDING DUE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE RESPECTIVE ASSESSES. THE ASSESSES ARE AT FURTHER LIBERTY FURNISH EVIDENCE, IF ANY, TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CLAIM. SINCE THE ASSESSES HAVE BEEN GRANTED FAIR OPPORTUNITY, THEREFORE, THE TIME LIMIT OF COMPLETI ON WITHIN TWO MONTHS, AS DIRECTED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), IS WITHDRAWN. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS DIRECTED TO COMPLETE WITHIN REASONABLE TIME/AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. 7. FINALLY, SUBJECT TO THE ABOVE RIDER, ALL THE APPEALS OF TH E REVENUE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON 01.10.2012. ITA NO. 4093,4094,4095,4096/DEL/2012 5 5. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE ABOVE ORDER, WE DISMISS THE PRESENT APPEA LS OF THE REVENUE WITH THE R I DER INDICATED IN THE PRECEDENT RELIED UPON. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. O RDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30/09/2014. SD/ - SD/ - ( T.S.KAPOOR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( I.C. SU DHIR ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: BINITA 30/9/14 COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, NEW DELHI. BY ORDER DEPUTY REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI