Aviators India Private Limited, Bangalore V. The Assistant commissioner of Income Tax (TDS-CPC), Ghaziabad

ITA 623/BANG/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 116 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6960 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 01-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHREEMARI KUSTA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; TDS
• Section: 234E

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.623/BANG/2019 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2016-17 AVIATORS INDIA PVT. LTD., NO.1309, BRIGADE TOWERS, BRIGADE ROAD, BENGALURU-560 025. PAN AABCA 4499 H VS. THE TDS CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTRE AAYKAR BHAVAN, SECTOR-3, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD, U.P-201010. BENGALURU. APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHREEMARI KUSTA, C.A RESPONDNET BY : SHRI R.N SIDDAPPAJI, ADDL. CIT DATE OF HEARING : 25.07.2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : .07.2019 O R D E R PER B.R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAIN ST THE ORDER DATED 19/3/2019 PASSED BY LD CIT(A), BENGALURU AND IT RELATES TO ASST. YEAR 2016-17. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A) IN REJECTING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN LIMINE, WIT HOUT CONDONING THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE HIM. ITA NO.623/BANG/2019 PAGE 2 OF 5 3. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. TH IS APPEAL RELATES TO LEVY OF FEES U/S 234E OF THE ACT. THE A SSESSEE HAS FILED THE QUARTERLY STATEMENT OF TDS BELATEDLY AND HENCE FEES U/S 234E OF THE ACT WAS LEVIED FOR THE DELAY IN FILING VARIO US RETURNS, WHILE PROCESSING THE STATEMENT OF TDS (TDS RETURNS). 4. THE ASSESSEE FIELD THE APPEAL CHALLENGING THE LE VY OF FEE U/S 234E OF THE ACT, BUT THE SAME WAS DISMISSED BY THE LD CIT(A) ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPEAL IS BARRED BY LIMITATION BY 457 DAYS. HENCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE US . 5. THE LD AR SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT RE CEIVE ANY NOTICE OF DEMAND FROM THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT PHY SICALLY AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE DEMAND RAIS ED UPON IT. THE ASSESSEE CAME TO KNOW OF THE DEMAND RAISED U/S 234E OF THE ACT, ONLY WHEN IT VERIFIED THE DETAILS OF OUTSTANDI NG DEMAND IN THE INCOME-TAX SITE (TRACES PORTAL). UPON NOTICING THE SAME THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). 6. THE LD AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE TASK OF F ILING TDS RETURNS WAS ENTRUSTED TO A STAFF NAMED SHRI DEEN DAYAL AND THE ASSESSEE HAS NOTICED THAT THE SAID STAFF HAS REGISTERED HIS EMAIL.ID WITH THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF UPLOADING OF T DS RETURNS. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD CIT(A) HAS NOTICED THAT THE N OTICE OF DEMAND HAS BEEN SENT TO THE E-MAIL ID REGISTERED WITH THE DEPARTMENT AND HENCE HE DID NOT AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. ITA NO.623/BANG/2019 PAGE 3 OF 5 7. HOWEVER, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE INTIMATION HAS BEEN SENT TO THE EMAIL.ID OF THE ABOVE SAID STAFF A ND HE DID NOT INFORM ABOUT THE SAME TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD A.R FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE ABOVE SAID STAFF HAS RESIGNED FR OM THE SERVICES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY ON 19/9/2006. ACCORDINGLY THE LD AR SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE IN FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) AND ACCORDINGLY SUBM ITTED THAT THE LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING TO CONDONE THE DELAY. 8. ON THE CONTRARY, THE LD DR SUBMITTED THAT THE AS SESSEE HAS BEEN FILING TDS RETURNS REGULARLY AND HENCE IT COUL D HAVE VERY WELL ASCERTAINED THE OUTSTANDING DEMAND BY VERIFYING TRA CES PORTAL OF INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT. ACCORDINGLY THE LD DR SUBMIT TED THAT THERE WAS NO REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE ASSESSEE IN FILING THE APPEAL BELATEDLY BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND HE WAS JUSTIFIED IN REFUSING TO CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. 9. WE NOTICED THAT THERE IS NO DISPUTE WITH REGARD TO THE FACT THAT THE EMAI.ID REGISTERED WITH THE INCOME-TAX D EPARTMENT IS THAT OF THE EMPLOYEE OF THE ASSESSEE NAMED SHRI DEE N DAYAL. IT IS STATED THAT THE ABOVE SAID STAFF HAS RESIGNED FROM THE SERVICES OF THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IN SEPTEMBER 2016. IT IS THE SUBM ISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ABOVE SAID STAFF DID NOT INTIMATE ABOUT THE DEMAND RAISED WHILE PROCESSING THE TDS STATEMENT. ADMITTEDLY, THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE E-MAIL OF THE STAFF. IT IS THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT IT CAME TO KNOW ABOUT THE DEMAND ONLY WHEN IT VERIFIED THE TRACES PORTAL. AC CORDINGLY IT HAS FILED THE APPEAL IMMEDIATELY BEFORE THE LD CIT(A) B Y QUOTING THE DATE ITA NO.623/BANG/2019 PAGE 4 OF 5 OF MAILING OF INTIMATION TO THE STAFF, WHICH HAS RE SULTED IN DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE LD CIT(A). IN OUR VIEW, T HE ABOVE SAID EXPLANATIONS FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE CONSTITUTES REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE DELAY IN FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CIT(A). ACCORDINGLY WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE LD CIT(A) WAS NOT JUSTI FIED IN REFUSING TO CONDONE THE DELAY. 10. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING DISCUSSIONS, WE CON DONE THE DELAY IN FILING APPEAL BEFORE THE LD CT(A). SINCE THE LD CI T(A) HAS NOT ADJUDICATED THE ISSUES ON MERITS, WE DEEM IT PROPER TO RESTORE THIS APPEAL TO HIS FILE FOR ADJUDICATING THE ISSUES ON M ERITS. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST JULY, 2019. SD/ - (BEENA PILLAI) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (B.R BASKARAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, 31 ST JULY, 2019. /VMS / COPY TO: 1. THE APPLICANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3 . THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER A SST. REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE. ITA NO.623/BANG/2019 PAGE 5 OF 5 1. DATE OF DICTATION 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER . 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO SR.P.S .. 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE S R. P.S. .. 6. DATE OF UPLOADING THE ORDER ON WEBSITE.. 7. IF NOT UPLOADED, FURNISH THE REASON FOR DOING SO .. 8. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. DATE ON WHICH ORDER GOES FOR XEROX & ENDORSEMENT 10. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 11. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER . 12. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO DISPATCH SEC TION FOR DISPATCH OF THE TRIBUNAL ORDER . 13. DATE OF DESPATCH OF ORDER. ..