Anil Kumar Sushil Kumar Goel, Yamunanagar V. ITO (TDS), Panchkula

ITA 728/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86227 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-03-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 31-03-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 19-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL
• Keywords: Revised return
• Section: 27

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH B CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R.SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 728/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 ANIL KUMAR SUSHIL KUMAR GOEL, VS THE ITO (TDS), SAHARANPUR ROAD, SECTOR 2, YAMUNA NAGAR. PANCHKULA. PAN: AAYPG0708M & ITA NO. 729/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10 INDERJEET POULTRY FARM, VS THE ITO (TDS), VPO, AURANGABAD, SECTOR 2, YAMUNA NAGAR. PANCHKULA. PAN: RTKI00554B (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI TEJ MOHAN SING H RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S.K.MITTAL DATE OF HEARING : 31.03.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.03.2015 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM BOTH THE APPEALS BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEES ARE DIRECT ED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) KARNAL DATED 03.01.2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 CHALLENGING THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2 2. WE HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE PA RTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS STATED THAT ISSUE IS SAME IN BOTH THE APPEALS. THEREFORE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISPOSAL OF BOTH THE APPEALS, THE FACTS ARE TAKEN FROM ITA 728/ CHD/2014. 3. BRIEFLY THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT AS PER SU B-SECTION (5B) OF SECTION 139A OF THE ACT, THE DEDUCTOR IS R EQUIRED TO SPECIFY THE PANS OF DEDUCTEES IN THE QUARTERLY TDS RETURN FILED ON THE SYSTEM. IN CASE OF FAILURE TO GIVE CORRECT PAN NUMBERS, PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272B MAY BE LEVIED. ON PROCE SSING THE E-TDS QUARTERLY STATEMENT OF DEDUCTION OF TAX IN FO RM NO. 27EQ FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN APPEAL FILED ON 14.07.20 08, IT WAS NOTICED THAT IN CONTRAVENTION OF PROVISIONS OF SECT ION 139A OF THE ACT, PAN DETAILS OF 12 OUT OF 30 DEDUCTEES WERE FOUND TO BE INVALID/MISSING. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE SEPARA TE ORDER LEVIED THE PENALTY OF RS. 10,000/- UNDER SECTION 27 2B OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE CHALLENGED THE PENALTY ORDER BEF ORE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AND RAISED MANY PLEAS INCLUDING THE SU BMISSION THAT ASSESSEE HAS REVISED RETURN AND HAS CORRECTED THE DEFECT, IF ANY. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), HOWEVER, DISMISSED A PPEAL OF THE ACT. 4. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES, ITAT CHANDIGARH A BENCH IN ITA NOS. 564 TO 567/CHD/2014 IN THE CASE OF ASHOK KUMAR ARUN KUMAR GOEL VS ITO, PANCHKULA AND ITA 568/CHD/2014 IN THE CASE OF ASHOK KUMAR GOEL VS ITO, PANCHKULA VIDE ORDER DATED 10.09.2014 RESTORED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF ASSES SING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE FOR FILING THE CORR ECTION 3 STATEMENT ON THE MATTER AND ISSUE. THE FINDINGS IN THIS ORDER IN PARA 10 TO 13 ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER : 10. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSE D THE RECORD. THE ISSUE ARISING IN THE PRESENT APPE AL IS IN RELATION TO LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272B O F THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAD FURNISHED E-TDS QUARTERLY STATEMENT RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 AND I N THE SAID STATEMENT FOR QUARTER NO.3, THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOTED THAT THERE WAS DEFAULT IN QUOTING OF THE PAN NUMBERS. THE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO FURNISH T HE CORRECT PAN NUMBERS OF DEDUCTEES TOTALING 3 TAX DEDUCTEES IN QUARTER NO.3 THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED TH AT IT HAD CORRECTED ALL THE PAN NUMBERS OF THE TAX DEDUCTEES RELATING TO QUARTER NO.3 FOR FINANCIAL YE AR 2008-09, HOWEVER THE CIT(A) REJECTED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AS NO PROOF WAS FILED. THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAND CLAIMS THAT IT HAD FURNISHED CORRECTION STATEMENT BEFORE THE PASSING OF ORDER OF CIT(A), WH ICH HAS NOT BEEN TAKEN COGNIZANCE OF AND LEVY OF PENALT Y CONFIRM. 11. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IN CASE THE ASSESSEE HA D FURNISHED CORRECT PAN NUMBERS OF ALL THE TAX DEDUCTEES, THEN THE ASSESSEE IS NOT LIABLE TO LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE ACT BUT IN CASE T HE ASSESSEE HAD FAILED TO CORRECT THE PAN NUMBERS OF E VEN ONE DEDUCTEE, THEN THE ASSESSEE IS EXIGIBLE TO LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE ACT. THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT BEEN VERIFIED BY THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW AND IN ALL FAIRNESS, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO VERIFY THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE VIS--V IS THE CORRECTION STATEMENT FILED. IF THE SAME IS FOUND TO BE CORRECT, THEN NO PENALTY IS LEVIABLE UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE ACT FOR QUARTER NO.3 OF FINANCIAL YEAR 2008- 09. IN CASE THE ASSESSEE HAD DEFAULTED IN CORRECTING AN Y ONE PAN NUMBER OF ANY OF THE TAX DEDUCTEES THEN THE ASSESSEE IS LIABLE TO LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE ACT AT RS.10,000/- FOR EACH OF THE QUARTERS. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL AFFORD REASONABLE OPPORTUNI TY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE AND DECIDE THE ISSUE IN LINE WITH OUR DIRECTIONS. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPO SE. 12. THE FACTS & ISSUE IN ITA NOS. 565 TO 568/CHD/2014 ARE IDENTICAL TO FACTS IN ITA NO. 564/CHD/2014 AND OUR DECISION IN ITA NOS. 564 TO 568/CHD/2014 WOULD APPLY MUTATIS-MUTANDIS TO ITA NOS. 565 TO 568/CHD/2014 ALSO. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE IN I TA NOS. 564 TO 568/CHD/2014 ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PUR POSES. 4 5. CONSIDERING THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT O F THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF ASHOK KUMAR ARUN KUM AR GOEL (SUPRA), WE SET ASIDE THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BEL OW AND RESTORE THE MATTER AND ISSUE TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFIC ER WITH DIRECTION TO VERIFY THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE REGARDING FILING OF THE CORRECTION STATEMENT WHO SHALL RE-DECIDE THE MATTER ACCORDINGLY BY GIVING REASONABLE SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITY OF BEIN G HERD TO THE ASSESSEE AS IS DIRECTED IN THE CASE OF ASHOK KUMAR ARUN KUMAR GOEL (SUPRA). 6. IT IS STATED THAT FACTS ARE SAME IN THE CASE OF OTHER APPEAL IN ITA 729/CHD/2014 IN THE CASE OF INDERJEET POULTR Y FARM. THE ORDER IN THE CASE OF ANIL KUMAR SUSHIL KUMAR GO EL SHALL APPLY IN THIS CASE AS WELL. 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST MARCH,2015. SD/- SD/- (T.R.SOOD) (BHAVNESH SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 31 ST MARCH,2015. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH