ACIT, New Delhi V. M/s. Twenty First Century Finance Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5373/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 65950 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-12-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 06-12-2012
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 01-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS PRISCILLA SINGSIT
• Keywords: Audit objection
• Section: 201(1); 132

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.C.MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.5372/DEL/2011 & 5373/DEL/2011 FINANCIAL YEARS : 1993-94 & 1994-95 ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-51(1), NEW DELHI. VS. M/S TWENTY FIRST CENTURY FINANCE LIMITED, H-1, ZAMRUDPUR COMMUNITY CENTRE, KAILASH COLONY, NEW DELHI. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : MRS.PRISCILLA SINGSIT, SR.DR. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SALIL AGARWAL, ADVOCATE. DATE OF HEARING : 06.12.2 012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : .12.2012 ORDER PER JOGINDER SINGH, JM : BOTH THESE APPEALS ARE BY THE REVENUE CHALLENGING THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS DATED 15.9.2011 OF THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, NEW DELHI ON THE COMMON GROUND THAT ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A S WELL AS IN LAW, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECOMPU TE THE INTEREST LIABILITY U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT INTERPRETING THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO.8 OF 2009 DATED 24.11.2009 HOLDING THAT THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE CAS WOULD BE SUFFICIENT C OMPLIANCE FOR THE PURPOSES OF TAXES PAID BY THE DEDUCTEES. 2. DURING HEARING OF THESE APPEALS, WE HAVE HEARD M RS.PRISCILLA SINGSIT, LEARNED SR.DR AND SHRI SALIL AGARWAL, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR T HE ASSESSEE. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE IS IDENTICAL TO THE GROUND RA ISED WHEREAS THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE DEFENDED THE CONCLUSION DRAWN IN THE I MPUGNED ORDERS. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PER USED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE APPEAL BEF ORE THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY ITA-5372 & 5373/DEL/2011 2 AROSE FROM THE ORDERS DATED 24 TH JANUARY, 2000 PASSED U/S 201(1)/201(1A) FOR THE FINANCIAL YEARS 1993-94 AND 1994-95. A SEARCH U/S 132 OF THE ACT WAS CARRIED OUT ON 26.2.1997 AT THE OFFICE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE WH ERE CERTAIN INCRIMINATING DOCUMENTS WERE SEIZED. AS PER THE RECORDS, THESE DOCUMENTS C ONTAINED CERTAIN AUDIT OBJECTIONS FROM THE AUDITORS POINTING OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE COMPANY DID NOT DISCHARGE ITS OBLIGATION IN COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 192 TO 206 OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF THIS OBSERVATION, SUMMONS U/S 133(1) WERE ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO FURNISH CERTAIN INFORMATION. THE ASSESSEE, VIDE LETTER DATED 24.12 .1999, ALONGWITH THE PROOF OF TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE RELATING TO FY 1993-94, CLAIMED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER EVIDENCING THAT TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED. THE LEARNED CIT(A) AT PAGE 2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER HAS MENTIONED THE NECESSARY DETAILS. THE ASS ESSING OFFICER HELD THE ASSESSEE TO BE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT. ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED CIT(A) AS WELL AS THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE APPEAL. THE MATTER WAS CARRIED IN APPEAL BEFORE TH E HONBLE HIGH COURT WHEREIN VIDE ORDER DATED 8.11.2010, THE ISSUES WERE REMITTED BAC K. THE LEARNED CIT(A) EXHAUSTIVELY EXAMINED THE ISSUE AND FINALLY DIRECTED THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER TO RECOMPUTE THE INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT. FOR READY REFERENCE WE ARE REPRODUCING HEREUNDER THE RELEVANT PORTION FROM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) AS CON TAINED IN PARA 4.6 (PAGE 17) :- 4.6 AS REGARDS, INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT, T HE SAME WOULD BE NON- VARIABLE IN NATURE AND THE SAME WOULD HAVE TO BE RE COMPUTED AT THE RATE PRESCRIBED FROM DUE DATE OR END OF F.Y. TILL THE DA TE OF PAYMENT OF TAXES BY THE DEDUCTEE ASSESSEE I.E. FILING OF RETURN BY THE PAYEE COMPANY. AFTER THE ORDER OF HONBLE SC IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN COCA C OLA (P) LTD. 293 ITR 226 (SC), THE TAXES U/S 201(1) CAN BE VARIABLE ONE, IF THE DEDUCTEE COMPANIES HAD PAID TAXES EARLIER, BUT 201(1A) INTER EST IS FIXED AND IT HAS TO BE COMPUTED ON ACTUAL 201(1A) TAXES TO BE DEDUCT IBLE FROM PAYMENTS MADE BY DEDUCTOR TO DEDUCTEES AT THOSE RATES APPLIC ABLE AS PER LAW AND DURATION IS SPECIFIED AS ABOVE. THE AO IS DIRECTED TO RECOMPUTE THE INTEREST U/S 201(1A) ACCORDINGLY. ALL THE COMPANIES ARE GROUP COMPANIES AND THE TRANS ACTIONS TOOK PLACE IN F.Y. 1993-94 & 1994-95 WHICH ARE 16 TO 17 YEARS OLD . THE APPELLANT EXPRESSED ITS INABILITY TO OBTAIN THE LEDGER ACCOUN TS OF INDIVIDUAL ITA-5372 & 5373/DEL/2011 3 COMPANIES AND ALSO ASSESSEES OWN ACCOUNTS AS BOOKS WERE NOT TRACEABLE. HOWEVER, FROM THE FIGURES OF TAX AUDIT REPORT AND O THER RELEVANT RECORDS OF GROUP COMPANIES, THEY COULD FURNISH INFORMATION IN A BACKWARD MANNER TO ARRIVE AT ABOVE CONCLUSION. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THE DEPARTMENT SHOULD NOT FEEL AGGRIEVED AS THE BALL IS STILL IN THE GROUND OF THE REVENUE AS THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ONLY DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RECOMPUTE THE INT EREST LIABILITY, THEREFORE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE CONCLUSION DRAWN IN THE IMPUGNED A PPEALS IN THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A). IT IS AFFIRMED. FINALLY, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE HAVING NO MERIT, THEREFORE, DISMISSED. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH DECEMBER, 2012. SD/- SD/- (B.C.MEENA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 07.12.2012 VK. COPY FORWARDED TO: - 1. APPELLANT : ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-51(1), NEW DELHI. 2. RESPONDENT : M/S TWENTY FIRST CENTURY FINANCE LIMITED, H-1, ZAMRUDPUR COMMUNITY CENTRE, KAILASH COLONY, NEW DELHI. 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR