Executive Engineer Panchayati Raj, Ambala City V. ITO (TDS), Panchkula

ITA 410/CHANDI/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 68452 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 03-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-08-2013
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-04-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: J S NAGAR
• Assessee Lawyers: H K JINDAL
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 408 TO 411/CHD/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PANCHAYATI RAJ VS. THE ITO(TD S), PREM NAGAR, OPP.VIKAS VIHAR, PANCHKULA. AMBALA CITY. PAN: RTKE00847A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI H.K.JINDAL RESPONDENT BY : SHRI J.S.NAGAR, DR DATE OF HEARING : 19.08.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 03.09.2013 O R D E R PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, J.M, : THESE FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE SAME ASSESSEE ARE A GAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TA X (APPEALS), ROHTAK DATED 07.02.2013 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-1 0 AGAINST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTIONS 201(1) & 201(1A) OF THE INCO ME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT). 2. THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED IN AL L THE APPEALS READ AS UNDER: 1. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS HAS ERRED IN LAW AND FACTS OF THE CASE WHILE CONFIRMING DEMAND OF RS.6190/-(ITA NO.408/CHD/2013), RS.224920/- (ITANO.409/CHD/2013), RS.428330/-(ITA NO.410/CHD/2013) & RS.271410/-(ITA NO.411/CHD/2013) FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09 IMPOSED BY ITO TDS. 2 3. THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE BUNCH OF APPEALS IS AGA INST THE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF THE ACT. IN ITA NO.408/CHD/2013 THE GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS AG AINST CHARGING OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT AT RS.619 0/- IN RESPECT OF E- TDS QUARTERLY STATEMENT OF RETURN FILED IN FORM NO. 26Q FOR THE 1 ST QUARTER OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. IN ITA NO.4 09/CHD/2013 THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY RAISING OF DEMAND UNDER SE CTION 201(1) OF THE ACT AT RS.1,66,450/- BEING THE TDS DEDUCTED BUT NOT PAID AND FURTHER INTEREST CHARGED UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT A T RS.54,240 PLUS RS.4230 TOTALING RS.2,24,920/-. THE SAID DEFAULT W AS IN RESPECT OF E- TDS RETURN FILED IN FORM NO.26Q FOR THE 3 RD QUARTER OF FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. THE APPEAL IN ITA NO.410/CHD/2013 IS AGAI NST SHORT DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE AT RS.2950/- AND NON-DEPOSIT OF TA X AT RS.3,30,880/- UNDER SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF E-TDS FILED IN 26Q FOR THE 4 TH QUARTER OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. FURTHER IN TEREST UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT HAD BEEN CHARGED AT RS.94,500/- UNDER SECTION 201(1A), RESULTING IN TOTAL DEMAND OF RS.4,28,330/- . IN ITA NO.411/CHD/2013 THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD RAISED TH E DEMAND UNDER SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT BOTH FOR SHORT DEDUCTION OF TDS AT RS.23,800/- AND TAX DEDUCTED BUT NOT PAID AT RS.1,83,100/- IN R ESPECT OF E-TDS FILED IN FORM NO.24Q FOR THE 4 TH QUARTER OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. FURTHER INTEREST UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT H AS BEEN CHARGED AT RS.64,510/-, RESULTING IN TOTAL DEMAND OF RS.2,71,4 10/-. 4. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E HAD FILED E-TDS STATEMENT IN RESPECT OF DIFFERENT QUARTERS FOR FINA NCIAL YEAR 2008-09 AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND DEFAULT I.E. NON-PAYMEN T OF TDS AMOUNT DEDUCTED OR SHORT DEDUCTION OF TDS AT PRESCRIBED RA TES AND ALSO LATE PAYMENT OF TAXES. THE ASSESSEE WAS SHOW CAUSED TO GIVE REASONS FOR THE 3 SAID DEFAULT ENTRY-WISE WHICH WERE REPORTED IN THE TDS STATEMENT AND THE ASSESSEE WAS ALSO ADVISED TO FILE CORRECTION ST ATEMENT TO RECTIFY DATA ENTRY ERROR, IF ANY, WITHIN 15 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF S HOW CAUSE NOTICE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER THEREAFTER COMPUTED NET DEFAULT N OTICED AFTER THE EXPIRY OF STIPULATED PERIOD OF FILING THE CORRECTIO N STATEMENT AND THE SAME WERE TABULATED AS PER ANNEXURE-A TO THE RESPEC TIVE ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT AND/OR UNDER SECTIO N 201(1A) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE WAS HELD TO BE IN DEFAULT IN RESPECT O F THE AMOUNT SPECIFIED IN THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS AND DEMAND WAS RAISED UNDE R SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT AND THE INTEREST WAS CHARGED UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE QUARTERS AS REFERRED TO BY U S IN THE PARAS HEREINABOVE. 5. BEFORE THE CIT (APPEALS) THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESS EE WAS THAT TDS FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL, MAY AND JUNE HAD BEEN PROPE RLY DEDUCTED AND DEPOSITED WITH THE TIME. THE CIT (APPEALS) FORWARD ED THE INFORMATION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER BUT NO RESPONSE WAS RECEIV ED FROM THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE CIT (APPEALS) THUS OBSERVED AS UNDER: 5. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE ISSUE AND THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE AUDIT REPORT. THE REMEDY FOR THE RELIE F SOUGHT BY THE APPELLANT LIES WITH FILING CORRECTION STATEMENTS SO THAT THE DATA MIS-MATCHES ARE CORRECT ED BY THE SYSTEM AUTOMATICALLY AND NOT FILING APPEAL BEFORE ME AS NO LEGAL ISSUE IS INVOLVED. SINCE THE APPELLANT HAS ALREADY SUBMITTED THE DETAILS TO THE AO, THE AO IS DIRECTED TO DISPOSE THE REPRESENTATION ON MERITS. THE APPEAL IS THEREFORE TREATED AS DISMISS ED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SINCE THE ISSUES IN OTHE R APPEALS ARE ALSO SIMILAR, THEY ARE ALSO TREATED AS DISMISSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS ARE DISMISSED. 6. THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT TH AT THOUGH THE CIT (APPEALS) DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DISPOSE OF THE REPRESENTATION ON MERITS BUT THE APPEALS WERE TREATED AS DISMISSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE WAS AGGRIEVED BY TH E SAID OBSERVATION 4 OF THE CIT (APPEALS). THE LEARNED A.R. FOR THE ASS ESSEE FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT IT HAD FILED CORRECTION STATEMENT AND IN V IEW OF THE SAME THERE WAS NO DEFAULT IN RESPECT OF THE PAYMENT OF TDS. 7. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 8. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORD. THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE DEMAND RAISED UNDER SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT AND INTEREST CHARGED UNDE R SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS DEDUCTOR OF TAX AT SOURCE WAS LIABLE TO DEPOSIT THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE TO THE TREASURY WITHIN T HE STIPULATED TIME. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, HOWEVER, NOTED THAT THERE WA S DEFAULTS IN THE DEPOSIT OF TDS ON TWO ACCOUNTS I.E. SHORT DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE AND ALSO NON DEPOSIT OF CERTAIN TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. THE INFORMATION WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE E-TDS QUARTERLY STATEM ENT OF RETURN IN FORM 26Q/24Q. HOWEVER, THERE WERE CERTAIN DISCREPANCIES FOUND BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN RESPECT OF THE DEDUCTION OF TA X AT SOURCE AND ITS DEPOSIT, FOR WHICH SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WAS ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT RECONCILE THE SAID DIFFERENCE AND CONSEQUENTLY DEMAND WAS RAISED UNDER SECTION 201(1) OF THE ACT AND FOR NON-DEPOSIT OF THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE IN TIME, INTEREST WAS CHARGED UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT IT HAD FILED CORRECTION STATEMENT IN RESPECT OF DEFAUL T POINTED OUT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND ON MATCHING OF ENTRIES IT WOU LD BE CLEAR THAT THERE WERE NO DEFAULT IN THE DEPOSIT OF TAX AT SOURCE ON EITHER OF THE TWO ACCOUNTS. AS PER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT THE ASSESSE E HAD TO FILE QUARTERLY E-TDS RETURNS ON THE COMPUTER SYSTEM AND IN CASE OF ANY DEFAULT OR ERROR THE SAME HAD TO BE CORRECTED BY FILING THE CORRECTI ON STATEMENT. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TO HAVE FILED CORRECTION STATEMENT IN ORDER TO MATCH THE 5 DEFAULTS POINTED OUT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOW EVER, THE SAID CORRECTION STATEMENT NEED TO BE VERIFIED BY THE ASS ESSING OFFICER IN ORDER TO COME TO THE CONCLUSION WHETHER THERE IS AN Y DEFAULT ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEPOSITING THE TAX. IN THE ENTI RETY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE WE DEEM IT FIT TO RESTORE THE ISSUE BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER, WHO SHALL DECIDE THE SAME DE-NOVO AFTER AFFORDING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO FURNISH COMPLETE INFOR MATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER I.E. BOTH IN RESPECT OF ORIGINAL TDS QUARTERLY STATEMENT FILED AND CORRECTION STATEMENT FILED IN T HAT REGARD AND RECONCILE THE SAME. ACCORDINGLY, THE ISSUE IS SET ASIDE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-DETERMINE THE DEFAULT, IF A NY, UNDER SECTIONS 201(1) AND WHETHER ANY INTEREST IS CHARGEABLE UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSES SEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 9. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE FOUR APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 3 RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 3 RD SEPTEMBER, 2013 *RATI* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT(A)/TH E CIT/THE DR. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6