The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bareilly V. National Insurance Co. Ltd., Shahjahanpur

ITA 611/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7979 (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: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-07-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O N PATHAK
• Assessee Lawyers: DHARMENDRA KUMAR

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. 611/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005 - 06 INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) BAREILLY V. NATIONAL IN SURANCE CO. LTD. SADAR BAZAR, SHAHJAHANPUR T AN: LKNN05115S (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: SHRI. O.N. PATHAK, D.R. RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. DHARMENDRA KUMAR, C.A. 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 IS 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 WIT HOUT ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO IN TERMS OF RULE 46A (3) OF THE IT RULES 1962. 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 NEITHE R PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO NOR IT WAS 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 REQUIRE D VERIFICATION AND REVISE THE ORDER 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 VERIFICATION AND REVISE THE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE PROCESSING OF TDS STATEMENTS ARE FULLY CENTRALIZED AT CPC (TDS) V AISHALI GHAZIABAD AND THE AO HAS NO 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 RECTIFICATIONS 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 CP C(TDS). THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE EXAMINED 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 I MPLEMENTATION OF HIS DIRECTIONS ARE 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 . ON PERUSAL OF RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) HAS TREATED THE ASSESSEE IN DEFAULT AND RAISED A DEMAND OF INTEREST UNDER SECTION 201(1A) OF THE ACT, FOR WHICH AN APPEAL WAS FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSE E HAS FURNISHED THE DETAILS OF DEDUCTION OF TDS. THE LD. CIT(A) HAVING EXAMINED THE SAME RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE ITO(TDS) WITH A DIRECTION TO MAKE NECESSARY VERIFICATION AND PASS A SUITABLE ORDER. PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 3 - : 3 . AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE T HE TRIBUNAL AND PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4 . THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS PLACED RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5 . HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SIMPLY SE T ASIDE THE MATTER TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION WITH REGARD TO THE TDS DEDUCTED AND DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE. SINCE WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE DIRECTIONS OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE CONFIRM HIS ORDER. 6 . IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENT I ONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29 TH AUGUST , 2014 JJ: 2708 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLA NT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )