IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES A (SMC) : HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.NO.510 & 511/HYD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-2008 & 2008-2009 MIRYALAGUDA MUNICIPALITY, MIRYALAGUDA, NALGONDA. PAN HYDCO3155F VS. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-15 HYDERABAD. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : MR. D. SATYANARAYANA FOR REVENUE : MR. A. SITARAMA RAO DATE OF HEARING : 25.11.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.11.2016 ORDER THESE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-8, HYDERABAD DATED 07.01.201 6 AND THEY PERTAINS TO THE A.YS. 2007-2008 & 2008-2009. 2. THE ONLY RAISED IN BOTH THE APPEALS RELATES TO THE PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTION 272A(2(G) OF THE I.T. ACT I.E., PENALTY FOR ISSUANCE OF TDS CERTIFICATES BELATEDLY. 3. AT THE OUTSET, THERE IS A DELAY OF 01 DAY IN FILING THE ABOVE APPEALS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THE ASSESSEE FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REASONS IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE TH E TRIBUNAL. I HAVE SATISFIED WITH THE REASONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESS EE IN THE AFFIDAVIT AND ACCORDINGLY I CONDONE THE DELAY AND ADM IT THE APPEALS. 2 ITA.NOS.510 & 511/HYD/2016 MIRYALAGUDA MUNICIPALITY, MIRYALAGUDA, NALGONDA DISTRICT 4. BRIEFLY STATED, THE ASSESSEE IS A LOCAL AUTHORITY AN D MADE PAYMENTS TOWARDS GARBAGE CLEARANCE TO SRI R. RAMCHANDE R RAO WHO IS A CIVIL CONTRACTOR OF THE MIRYALAGUDA MUNICIPA LITY. THE ASSESSEE DEDUCTED TDS BUT THERE IS A DELAY IN ISSUIN G FORM 16A TO THE SAID CONTRACTOR. THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFIC ER LEVIED PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272A(2)(G) OF THE I.T. ACT, AGAI NST WHICH, THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WITH A DELAY OF 458 DAYS IN BOTH THE APPEALS. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED T HE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVING THAT THE REAS ONS FOR THE DELAY HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED PROPERLY. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEALS BEFORE ME. 5. AT THE OUTSET, THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BR OUGHT TO MY ATTENTION TO THE CONTENTS OF PARA-4 OF THE ORDER OF TH E CIT(A) AND SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) HAS FAILED TO GIVE THE REASO NS FOR CATEGORIZING THE ASSESSEES EXPLANATION NOT SATISFACTORY AND SUMMARILY DISMISSED THE REASONS GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT PASSING ANY SPEAKING ORDER ON THE ISSUES. THE LEARN ED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THIS ISSUE RAISED IN THE GROUNDS IN BOTH THE APPEALS MAY BE REMANDED TO THE FI LE OF THE CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION WITH A DIRECTION TO EXAMI NE THE DATE OF REMITTANCE OF THE TDS DEDUCTED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE DATES OF REMITTANCE TO THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT, THE REASONS SUBM ITTED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ISSUANCE OF THE TDS CERTIFICATES BE LATEDLY ETC., 6. ON HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, I FIND MERIT IN THE LE ARNED COUNSELS ARGUMENTS. IN MY VIEW, THE CONTENTS IN PARA-4 OF THE CIT(A) ORDER FALLS SHORT OF THE MEANING OF A SPEAKING ORDER WHICH IS EXPECTED BY ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY AS PER THE PRO VISIONS OF 3 ITA.NOS.510 & 511/HYD/2016 MIRYALAGUDA MUNICIPALITY, MIRYALAGUDA, NALGONDA DISTRICT SECTION 250 SUB-SECTION (6) OF THE I.T. ACT. I, THEREFOR E, ALLOW THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. 7. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 25.11.2016. SD/- (D.KARUNAKARA RAO) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED 25 TH NOVEMBER, 2016 VBP/- COPY TO 1. MIRYALAGUDA MUNICIPALITY, MIRYALAGUDA, NALGONDA DISTRICT. C/O. SHRI S. RAMA RAO, ADVOCATE, FLAT NO.102, SHRIYA S ELEGANCE, 3-6-643, STREET NO.9, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERAB AD. 2. THE ADDL. CIT, RANGE-15, HYDERABAD. 3. CIT(A)-8, HYDERABAD. 4. CIT (TDS), HYDERABAD. 5. D.R. ITAT A (SMC) BENCH, HYDERABAD. 6. GUARD FILE.