STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR, Jaipur V. ITO, Jaipur

ITA 650/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 99521 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BHATEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: GOPAL GUPTA
• Keywords: Revised return

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF; D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 650/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 STATE BANK OF BIKANER & JAIPUR, BRANCH AMER, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-2, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: AADCS 4750 R VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI GOPAL GUPTA (C.A.) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI O.P. BHATEJA (ADDL. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 19/11/2015 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27/11/2015 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER: T.R. MEENA, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17/04/2013 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A)-III, JAIPUR FOR A.Y. 2007-08. THE EFFECTIVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE AS UNDER:- (I) THE LD CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE CORR ECTION STATEMENT/REVISED RETURN SHOULD BE FILED WHILE THE FVU IN WHICH THE CORRECTIONS ARE TO FILE ARE NOT AVAILABLE. ITA 650/JP/2013_ SBBJ VS. ITO(TDS) 2 (II) THE LD CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT THE CORRECTIONS REQUIRED ARE IN THE JURISDICTION OF YOU R APPELLANT. (III) THE LD CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT TDS DE DUCTED RUPEES 495380.00 WAS NOT PAID WHILE THE WHOLE TDS DEDUCTED RUPEES 495380.00 WAS ALREADY PAID IN DUE COURSE. (IV) THE LD CIT(A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT TDS CHAL LANS PRODUCED BEFORE HIM WERE WRONG AND ACCOUNT BOOKS AND OTHER EVIDENCES AVAILABLE WITH APPELLANT WERE NOT RELEVANT FOR ESTABLISHING THE PAYMENT OF TDS. (V) THE LD CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFORMING THE LEVY OF INT EREST OF RUPEES 250960.00 U/S 201(1)/201(1A). (VI) FOR THAT THE PENALTY PROCEEDINGS INITIATED UND ER THE INCOME TAX ACT 1961 IS NOT APPLICABLE IN THE CASE O F YOUR APPELLANT. 2. IN THIS CASE, THE LD CIT(A) HAS UPHELD THE ORDER OF THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER BY HOLDING THAT DURING THE APPEAL PROCEEDINGS, LD AR SUBMITTED THAT THE DEMAND WAS RAISED DUE TO WRONG MEN TION OF TAN IN THE TAX PAYMENT CHALLAN. ON DUE CONSIDERATION OF TH E MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORDS, IT IS EVIDENT THAT THERE WAS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE ITO, TDS AGAINST WHICH THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FIL ED. APPELLANT HAD ADMITTED HIS MISTAKES. HE IS REQUIRED TO RECTIFY HI S MISTAKES BY FILING CORRECTION STATEMENT/REVISED RETURN. THE GROUNDS RAI SED BY THE APPELLANT HAVE, THEREFORE, NO BASIS AND ACCORDINGLY REJECTED. ITA 650/JP/2013_ SBBJ VS. ITO(TDS) 3 3. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS ADMITTED THE DEFECTS THAT WRONG TAN HAS BEEN MENTIONED ON THE TDS RETURN BY THE ASSESSEE BUT THESE FACTS WER E BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS LD CIT(A) IN GROUNDS OF APPEAL AND ARGUED THAT THE ASSESSEES CORRECT TAN NUMBER I S JPRS00749A, WHICH CAN BE RECTIFIED BY THE ITO (TDS) ONLY. THIS WAS I NTIMATED BY THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 07/5/2012 TO THE ITO(TDS) -2 ALONGWITH COPY OF AFFIDAVIT, PHOTOCOPY OF CHALLAN DEPOSITED, PHOTO COPY OF LETTER RECEIVED FROM THE HEAD OFFICE. THE LD ASSESSING OFFI CER HAD NOT RECTIFIED TILL DATE, THEREFORE, HE PRAYED TO ALLOW THE ASSESSE ES APPEAL. 4. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD DR HAS VEHEMENTLY ACCEPTED THAT THIS CAN BE RECTIFIED BY THE ITO(TDS) BY ACCEPTING THE CORRECT TA N ON THE BASIS OF ASSESSEES RECTIFICATION APPLICATION. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON THE RECORD. THE AS SESSEE HAD PROVIDED CORRECT TAN AND ALSO REQUESTED TO ITO(TDS) -2 TO RECTIFY THE MISTAKE, WHICH IS APPARENT. FURTHER THIS MISTAKE CAN BE RECTIFIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON SYSTEM, THEREFORE, THE LD ITO(TD S) IS DIRECTED TO ITA 650/JP/2013_ SBBJ VS. ITO(TDS) 4 MAKE NECESSARY CORRECTION BY ACCEPTING THE CORRECT TAN. ACCORDINGLY WE ALLOW THE ASSESSEES APPEAL. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27/11/2015. SD/- SD/- YFYR DQEKJ VH-VKJ-EHUK (LALIET KUMAR) (T.R. MEENA) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED 27 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SBBJ, AMER BRANCH, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO TDS-2, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 650/JP/2013). VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR