The Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana V. ITO(TDS), Ludhiana

ITA 792/CHANDI/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 57743 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-03-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-03-2012
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 11-08-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N K SAINI
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; TDS
• Section: 133A; 201(1)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI H.L.KARWA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.792 TO 797/CHD/2011 A.YS: 2004-05 TO 2009-10 THE LUDHIANA IMPROVEMENT V ITO (TDS)-II, TRUST, FEROZE GANDHI MARKET, LUDHIANA. LUDHIANA. PAN: AAAT-4452-F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI ASHWANI KUMAR RESPONDENT BY :SHRI N.K.SAINI DATE OF HEARING : 13.03.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.03.2012 ORDER PER MEHAR SINGH, AM THE PRESENT BUNCH OF SIX APPEALS HAVE BEEN FILED BY THE SAME ASSESSEE, AND ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE CONSOLI DATED ORDER DATED 02.06.2011 PASSED BY THE LD. CIT(A)-II LUDHIANA U/S 250(6) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT,1961 (IN SHORT 'TH E ACT'). 2. IN THESE APPEALS, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED IDENTI CAL GROUNDS, HAVING IDENTICAL FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, CHALLENGING THE LEVY OF TAX U/S 201 AND INTEREST U/ S 201(IA) OF THE ACT AND CONFIRMATION OF THE SAME BY THE CIT( A). FOR THE SAKE OF READY REFERENCE, THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED IN ITA NO. 792/CHD/2011 (A.Y. 2004-05) ARE REPRODUCED HEREUNDER, AS ILLUSTRATIVE CASE : 1. THAT THE ORDER PASSED U/S 250(6) BY THE LD CIT( A)-II, LUDHIANA IS AGAINST LAW AND FACTS ON THE FILE IN AS MUCH AS HE WAS NOT JUSTIFIED TO ARBITRARILY UPHOLD THE ACTION OF THE LD. ITO (TDS)-II LUDHIANA IN 2 LEVYING TAX U/S 201(1) AT RS.2,97,938/- AND INTERES T U/S 201(1A) AT RS.2,11,537/-. 2. THAT THE LD. CIT(A), WHILE ADJUDICATING THE APPE AL GROSSLY VIOLATED THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND SIMPLY IGNORED TO CONSIDER THE IMPORT OF DETAILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION MADE BY THE APPELLANT. 3. IN THE COURSE OF PRESENT APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, LD. 'AR' FILED A DETAILED CHART INDICATING VARIOUS DISCREPANCIES AND NON-APPLICABILITY OF THE PROVISIO NS OF SECTION 194C(3)(1) OF THE ACT. LD. 'AR' HAS FURNISH ED A DETAILED CHART FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 TO 2 009- 2010 INDICATING COMPLETE DETAILS OF EXPENSES, INCLU DING DETAILS OF TDS AND HIS COMMENTS ON EACH ITEM OF PAYMENTS. THE LD. 'AR' CONTENDED THAT THE ISSUE BE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR THE PURPOSE OF F RESH ADJUDICATION, IN THE LIGHT OF DETAILED WRITTEN SUBM ISSION MADE BY HIM. LD. 'DR' ARGUED THAT THE ORDERS PASSE D BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH RELEVA NT PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. 4. WE HAVE CAREFULLY PERUSED THE FACTS OF THE CASE AND RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT A SURVEY-CUM-INSPECTION U/S 133A WAS CARRIED OUT BY T HE ITO (TDS) IN THE OFFICE OF THE APPELLANT FROM 15.10 .2009 TO 27.10.2009. DURING THE COURSE OF SURVEY, INSTAN CES OF NON-DEDUCTION/SHORT DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE BY T HE APPELLANT WERE NOTICED. THEREFORE, A SHOW CAUSE NO TICE DATED 30.10.2009 WAS ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT TO EXP LAIN DISCREPANCIES. APPELLANT FURNISHED A REPLY DATED 3 03.12.2009 TO THE ITO (TDS) ON 09.12.2009. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAME, ITO(TDS) RAISED A DEMAND U/S 201(1) & 201(1A) OF THE ACT. LD. CIT(A) HAD UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO IN CONSOLIDATED ORDER DATED 02.06 .2011 WHEREBY FINDINGS OF THE ITO (TDS) LUDHIANA WERE UPH ELD. 5. A PERUSAL OF THE DETAILED SUBMISSIONS FILED BY T HE ASSESSEE REVEALS THAT IT WAS CONTENDED THEREIN THAT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2003-04, AO HAS WRONGLY AGGREGAT ED THE PAYMENTS MADE TO EACH PERSON, AS THE PROVISION OF AGGREGATION OF PAYMENTS U/S 194C(3)(1) WAS INSERTED W.E.F. 01.10.2004. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND 2006-07, SPECIAL AUDIT WAS CONDUCTED BY THE INCOME TAX DEPTT. AND THE AMOUNT O F BOTH THESE YEARS HAD ALREADY BEEN ASSESSED IN THE H ANDS OF THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT, HAVING BEEN DISALLOWED U /S 40A(IA) OF THE ACT.LD. 'AR' CONTENDED THAT THERE IS NO JUSTIFICATION IN MAKING THE TAX DEMAND U/S 201(1) A ND INTEREST DEMAND U/S 201(1A) OF THE ACT. LD.'AR' A LSO REFERRED TO THE APPLICABILITY OF THE RATIO OF THE D ECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGE P.LTD. V CIT 293 ITR 226 (S.C). 6. HAVING REGARD TO THE FACT-SITUATION OF THE CASE AND THE MATERIAL AND RELEVANT ISSUES RAISED BY THE LD. 'AR' IN HIS DETAILED CHART REFERRED TO ABOVE, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ISSUES DESERVE TO BE RE STORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROPER AN D JUDICIOUS ADJUDICATION OF THE SAME AFRESH. ACCORDIN GLY, 4 WE RESTORE SUCH ISSUES FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. THE AO SHOULD PROVIDE REASONABLE AND PROPER OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE AND ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH, IN ACCORD ANCE WITH RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIRECTED TO PROVIDE EFFECTIVE AND MEANINGFUL COOPER ATION TO THE AO FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADJUDICATING THE ISSUE AFRESH. 7. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE A RE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. THE DETAILED CHA RT FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ENDORSED AS PART OF THIS ORDER, AS ANNEXURE A. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 21 ST MARCH,2012. SD/- SD/- (H.L.KARWA) (MEHAR SINGH) VICE PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 21 ST MARCH,2012. POONAM COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT ,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH