State Bank of India, Ahmedabad V. The Income Tax Officer, TDS-4, Ahmedabad

ITA 644/AHD/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1747 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 25 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 14-11-2019
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 15-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: S N DIVATIA; MEHUL TALERA ARS
• Keywords: TDS
• Section: 201(1)

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, D BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY,JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO.644/AHD/2017 & / ASSTT. YEAR:2012-2013 STATE BANK OF INDIA , ZONAL ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, C N VIDHYALAYA CAMPUS, AMBAWADI, AHMEDABAD-380015. PAN: AAACS8577K VS. I.T. O , TDS-4, AHMEDABAD ( APPLICANT ) ( RESPONENT ) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S.N. DIVATIA & SHRI MEHUL TALERA, A.RS REVENUE BY : SHRI DILIP KUMAR , SR. DR / DATE OF HEARING : 14/11/2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10/12/2019 *+/ O R D E R PER MS MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THE INSTANT APPEAL AT THE INSTANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISCUSSED AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 28.04.2015, PASSED BY THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-8, AHMEDABAD, ( IN SHORT LD.CIT(A) ) ARISING OUT OF THE ORDER DATED 28.03.2014 PASSED BY THE JOINT COMMISS IONER OF INCOME TAXUNDER SECTION 201(1) & 201(1A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961(HEREIN AFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT)FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2 012-2013. 2. IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS 621 DAYS DELAY PREFERRI NG THE SAID APPEAL BEFORE US BY THE APPELLANT. HENCE, AN APPLICATION FOR CON DONATION OF DELAY U/S. 253(5) OF THE ACT HAS BEEN FILED EXPLAINING SUCH DE LAY. UPON PERUSAL OF THE ITA NO.644/AHD/2017 A.Y.2012-2013 2 SAME IT APPEARS THAT THE ORDER DATE 28.04.2015 PASS ED BY THE LD. CIT(A) WAS COMMUNICATED TO THE APPELLANT ON 05.05.2015 AND THU S THE APPEAL WAS REQUIRED TO BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 04.07.2015. HOWE VER, THE INSTANT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE APPELLANT ON 15.03.2017 CAUSING 6 21 DAYS DELAY. WE FIND THE CATEGORICAL STATEMENT MADE BY CHIEF MANAGER, HR SECTION ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, AHMEDABAD STATE BANK OF INDIA IN THE FORM O F AFFIDAVIT VERIFIED ON 14.07.2017 BEFORE THE NOTARY PUBLIC OF AHMEDABAD CI TY THAT AS SOON AS THE ORDER WAS RECEIVED AT THIS AND THE SAME WAS SEND TO THE CENTRAL LEGAL OFFICE HEADQUARTERS AT MUMBAI IN ORDER TO TAKE THE REMEDIA L MEASURE THEREOF. AFTER THE DECISION HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE SAID HEAD OFFICE THE WORK OF DRAFTING MEMO HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO THE PANEL COUNSEL. THE D RAFT, SO PREPARED, WAS THEREAFTER SENT FOR MODIFICATIONS AND/OR CORRECTION S BY THE CONCERNED PERSON. AN APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION FOR THE APPARENT E RRORS OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER, WAS THEREAFTER, FIRST BEEN DECIDED TO MAKE AND THEN TO PREFER THE SECOND APPEAL BEFORE THE HONBLE TRIBUNAL. ACCORDINGLY, RECTIFIC ATION APPLICATION, THOUGH FILED ON 03.07.2015 THE ZONAL OFFICE SUBSEQUENTLY H AS BEEN INFORMED THAT SUCH RECTIFICATION APPLICATION HAS NOT BEEN DISPOSE D OF BY THE LD. AO AND THEN IT WAS DECIDED TO FILE THE INSTANT FILE WITHOUT MAK ING ANY FURTHER DELAY AND THE PANEL COUNSEL UPON BEING INSTRUCTED FINALLY FILED T HE APPEAL. THUS, IT APPEARS THERE IS NEITHER ANY INTENTIONAL NOR ANY DELIBERATE DELAY CAUSED BY THE ASSESSEE BUT DUE TO UNAVOIDABLE CIRCUMSTANCES THE APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED LATE BEFORE US. AT THE TIME OF HEARING THE INSTANT APPEAL THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE RELIED UPON A JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE H ONBLE APEX COURT THAT IN THE CASE OF COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION VS. M/S. KS . KATIJI (167 ITR 471) TO SUPPORT HIS PRAYER FOR TAKING A LIBERAL APPROACH IN THE APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. HE HAS FURTHER RELIED UPON S EVERAL OTHER JUDGMENTS MENTIONED IN SUCH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. ITA NO.644/AHD/2017 A.Y.2012-2013 3 3. THE LD. AR, HOWEVER, WITH ALL HIS FAIRNESS HAS N OT RAISED ANY SERIOUS OBJECTION TO THAT OF GENUINE CONTENTIONS MADE BY TH E LD. ADVOCATE APPEARING FOR THE APPELLANT FOR CONDONING SUCH DELAY. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE P ARTIES, HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, PARTICU LARLY THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE DEPONENT OF THE AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING THE REA L ADMINISTRATIVE DIFFICULTY IN PREFERRING THE INSTANT APPEAL BEFORE US WHICH IN OU R CONSIDERED VIEW SEEMS TO BE GENUINE AND HENCE THE DELAY IS CONDONED. 5. THE BRIEF FACTS RELATING TO THIS CASE IS THIS TH AT SOME OF THE EMPLOYEES OF THE APPELLANTS BANK IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE SECTION OF SM ROAD, AHMEDABAD HAS VISITED FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND CLAIMED EXEMPTION OF LTC/LFC, U/S.192 OF THE ACT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. IT WAS FURTHER FOUND THAT DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12, 10 EMPLOYEES VISITED FOREIG N COUNTRIES CLAIMED LTC/LFC AGGREGATING RS.21,34,655/- WHICH WAS ULTIMA TELY ADDED IN THE HANDS OF THE ASSESSEE. 6. AT THE TIME OF HEARING OF THE INSTANT APPEAL, T HE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE ASSESSEE FAIRLY SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY AND UNDER SEVERAL JUDGMENTS PASSED BY THE CO-ORD INATE BENCH. HOWEVER, 2 PERSONS OUT OF THE SAID 10 HAD VISITED ONLY PORT BL AIR, ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLAND ON 27.04.2011THE PAYMENT WHEREOF WAS MADE ON 27.04.2011 AND 15.07.2011 AS IT APPEARS AT PAGE 3 OF THE ORDER PAS SED BY THE LD. CIT(A)S ORDER, WHICH ACCORDING TO THE LD. AR, BEING A LEGIT IMATE CLAIM REQUIRED TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE TOTAL DISALLOWANCE MADE IN RESPEC T OF LTC/LTS FOR FOREIGN TRAVEL. ITA NO.644/AHD/2017 A.Y.2012-2013 4 HOWEVER, LD.DR, HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO CONTROVERT TH IS PARTICULAR ASPECT OF THE MATTER. 7. HAVING HEARD THE LD. COUNSEL APPEARING FOR THE P ARTIES AND HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, P ARTICULARLY THE DETAILS OF TRAVELS OF THE 2 PERSONS TO ANDAMAN & NICOBAR ISLAN DS, WE ARE OF THE VIEW TO DIRECT THE AO TO EXCLUDETHE AMOUNT OF RS.1,81,958/- AND RS.1,83,220/- PAID TO ONE M C KALANI & Y S SONI RESPECTIVELY APPEARING AT PAGE 3 OF THE ORDER IMPUGNED BEFORE US FROM THE TOTAL AMOUNT DISALLOWAN CE. THE LD. AO IS DIRECTED TO GRANT RELIEF TO THE ASSESSE AS DIRECTED ABOVE. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS PAR TLY ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 10/12/2019 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- ( AMARJIT SINGH ) ACCOUTANT MEMBER ( MS MADHUMITA ROY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER TRUE COPY AHMEDABAD; DATED 10/12/2019 TANMAY, SR. PS *+ , -./0 1*0. / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ! / CONCERNED CIT 4. ! ( ) / THE CIT(A) 5. $%& '' , / DR, ITAT, 6. &)* + / GUARD FILE. *+ 2 3 / BY ORDER, 4/3 56 ( DY./ASSTT.REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, AHMEDABAD 1. DATE OF DICTATION : 15-11-2019 2. DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER 3. DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.P. S./P.S. - 4. DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE D ICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT .. 5. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. : 10-12-2019 6. DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 7. THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT RE GISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE