The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bareilly V. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Sitapur

ITA 612/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7977 (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

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. 612/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005 - 06 INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) BAREILLY V. THE NEW IN DIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. SITAPUR DO, STATION ROAD SITAPUR (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 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 WITHOUT 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 NEITHER 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 REQUIRED 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) VAISHALI 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 C I T(A) BEING A QUASI - JUDICIAL BODY HAS ERRED FURTHER IN DIRECTING THE AO(TDS) TO CARRY OUT RECT IFICATIONS 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 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 IMPLEMENTATION OF HIS DIRE CTIONS 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 . TH OUGH VARIOUS GROUNDS ARE RAISED, BUT THEY ALL RELATE TO THE DIRECTIONS ISSUED BY THE LD. CIT(A) FOR MAKING NECESSARY VERIFICATION WITH REGARD TO THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE AND TO PASS A SUITABLE ORDER. 3 . HAVING HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. D.R. AND A CAR EFUL PERUSAL OF RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ITO(TDS) PASSED AN ORDER ON THE BASIS OF INFORMATION AVAILABLE AT THAT TIME AND CALCULATED THE SHORT DEDUCTION OF TAX AND CHARGED INTEREST THEREON. ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 3 - : CIT(A) AND THE LD. CIT (A) HAS RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE ITO(TDS) WITH A DIRECTION TO MAKE NECESSARY VERIFICATION AND PASS SUITABLE ORDER , HAVING CONSIDERED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAS PAID DUE TAX IN TIME. 4 . AGGRIEVED, THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRI BUNAL. 5 . THOUGH NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE, BUT ON PERUSAL OF RECORD, WE FIND THAT THIS APPEAL CAN BE DISPOSED OF EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ASSESSEE, AS WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE DIRECTIONS OF THE LD. CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE O RDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND DISMISS THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. 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. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACC OUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 29 TH AUGUST , 2014 JJ: 27 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/ )