The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bareilly V. M/s Ashoka Foam, Bareilly

ITA 610/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7976 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-08-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 11-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O N PATHAK

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 610/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006 - 07 INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) BAREILLY V. M/S ASHOKA FOAM 106/B, CIVIL LINES BAREILLY T AN: LKNA05236A (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. O. N. PATHAK, D.R. RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 27 0 8 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 29 0 8 2014 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL I S PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), INTER ALIA, ON VARIOUS GROUNDS, WHICH ARE AS UNDER: - 1 . THE LD. CIT (APPEAL), BAREILLY HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND LAW BY ACCEPTING NEW EVIDENCE FROM THE DEDUCTOR WITHOUT ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNI TY TO THE AO IN TERMS OF RULE 46A (3) OF THE IT RULES 19 62. THE DEDUCTOR SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIT (A) THAT HE HAS DEDUCTED AND PAID THE DUE TAX AND THAT SHORT DEDUCTION/ NON - PAYMENT IS DUE TO MISMATCH. THIS FACT WAS NEITHER PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO NOR IT WA S REFLECTED ON THE ITD SYSTEM WHEN THIS ORDER U/S 201(1)/201 (1A) WAS PASSED. THE CIT (A) HAS ERONIOUSLY ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AND DIRECTED THE AO TO VERIFY THE CLAIM BY CALLING FOR NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND REVISE THE ORDE R ACCORDINGLY. PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 2 - : 2 . THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO CALL FOR NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR REQUIRED V ERIFICATION AND REVISE THE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE PROCESSING OF TDS STATEMENTS ARE FULLY CENTRALIZED AT CPC (TDS) VAISHALI GHAZIABAD AND THE AO HAS N O POWER TO REVISE THE ORDER. THE ONLY REMEDY FOR THE DEDUCTOR IS TO FILE CORRECTION STATEMENTS ON - LINE AND GET THE DEMAND REDUCED THROUGH CPC(TDS). 3 . THE CIT(A) BEING A QUASI - JUDICIAL BODY HAS ERRED FURTHER IN DIRECTING THE AO(TDS) TO CARRY OUT RECTIFICATION S WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS OF RECTIFICATION/CORRECTIONS LAID DOWN BY CPC(TDS). NO PROOF HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE DEDUCTOR BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO SHOW THAT THE NECESSARY CORRECTION STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN FILED WITH CPC(TDS). THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE EXA MINED ACTUAL PROCESSES LAID DOWN BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE ISSUING DIRECTIONS AND WHETHER SUCH DIRECTIONS ARE EXECUTABLE OR NOT. 4 . BY DOING SO IN 1, 2 , 3 ABOVE, THE CIT (A) HAS MECHANICALLY DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL, WHILE NO IMPLEMENTATION OF HIS DIRECTIONS AR E POSSIBLE AT A.O. (TDS) END. IN CASE OF MISMATCH, THE REMEDY LIES IN FILING OF CORRECTION STATEMENT WHICH ARE AUTOMATICALLY PROCESSED BY THE CPC (TDS). TILL CORRECTION STATEMENT IS PROCESSED, THE AO(TDS) ORDER STANDS, AND CANNOT BE CANCELLED. 2 . THE APPEAL WAS LISTED FOR HEARING ON 27.8.2014, BUT NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE , HOWEVER , HAS FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION STATING THEREIN THAT THE TDS WAS DEDUCTED AND PAID IN TIME. 3 . FROM A CAREFUL PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN THE LIGHT OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ITO(TDS) WITH A DIRECTION TO MAKE NECESSARY VERIFICATION AND PASS SUITABLE ORDER AND IF THE CLAIM OF PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 3 - : THE ASSESSEE IS FOUND IN ORDER, THERE WOULD REMAIN NO CASE TO TREAT THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT. 4 . AGGRIEVED WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE LD. CIT(A), AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND THE LD. D.R. HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 5 . HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CONSIDERED THE DETAILS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AND REFERRED THE MATTER TO THE ITO(TDS) FOR NECESSARY VERIFICATION OF THE CLAIM RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) AND WE ACCORDINGLY CONFIRM THE SAME. 6 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT I ONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GAR ODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29 TH AUGUST , 2014 JJ: 2 7 08 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )