M/s Krishna District Co-op Central Bank Ltd., Penuganchiprolu, Vijayawada v. The ITO, TDS, Vijayawada

ITA 522/VIZ/2010 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2011 | Result: Partly Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 52225314 RSA 2010
Assessee PAN AABTT0343E
Bench Visakhapatnam
Appeal Number ITA 522/VIZ/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant M/s Krishna District Co-op Central Bank Ltd., Penuganchiprolu, Vijayawada
Respondent The ITO, TDS, Vijayawada
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 11-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Partly Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 11-03-2011
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 06-12-2010
Judgment Text
ITA 517 TO 522 OF 10 KRISHNA DIST. COOP CENT. BANK LTD VJA IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BR BASKARAN ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 517 /VIZAG/ 20 10 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 KRISHNA DIST. CO - O P. CENTRAL BANK LTD. CHANDARLAPADU VS. ITO TDS VIJAYAWADA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN NO.AABTT 0343E ITA NO.518/VIZAG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 KRISHNA DIST. CO - OP. CENTRAL BANK LTD. VATSAVAI VS. ITO TDS VIJAYAWADA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDE NT) ITA NO.519& 520/VIZAG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 KRISHNA DIST. CO - OP. CENTRAL BANK LTD. JAGGAIAHPET VS. ITO TDS VIJAYAWADA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NO.521&522/VIZAG/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006 - 07 & 2007 - 08 KRISHNA DIST. C O - OP. CENTRAL BANK LTD. PENUGANCHIPROLU VS. ITO TDS VIJAYAWADA (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI A.C. GANGAIAH C.A RESPONDENT BY: SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH DR ORDER PER BENCH:- THESE APPEALS ARE PREFERRED BY THE DIFFERENT ASSE SSEES AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON CONFIRMING THE IMPOSITION OF INTEREST U/S 201(1A) OF THE I.T. ACT FOR THE DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT YEARS ALO NG WITH AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEALS. ITA 517 TO 522 OF 10 KRISHNA DIST. COOP CENT. BANK LTD VJA 2 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS NECESSARY TO ADJUDICATE THE R EQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING OF THESE APPEALS ARE THAT THE AS SESSEES HAVE FILED ONE APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL FOR DIFFERENT ASSESSMENT YEARS AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE CIT(A). DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOTICED THAT AGAINST EACH AND EVERY ASSESSMENT YEAR SEPARATE APPEALS ARE REQUIRED TO BE FILED AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF T HE INCOME-TAX ACT. THE TRIBUNAL ACCORDINGLY TREATED ONE APPEAL TO HAVE BEE N FILED FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 AND FOR THE REMAINING ASSESSMENT YEARS ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FILE A SEPARATE APPEAL AS PER PROVISIONS OF LAW. T HE TRIBUNAL ACCORDINGLY DISPOSED OF THE APPEALS FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 5-06 VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 28.7.2010. 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS STATED IN THEIR APPLICATION FO R CONDONATION OF DELAY THAT AFTER HAVING REALIZED THAT SEPARATE APPEALS AR E TO BE FILED FOR SEPARATE ASSESSMENT YEARS HE APPLIED FOR A CERTIFIED COPY B EFORE THE CIT(A) AS HE WAS SERVED WITH ONLY ONE CONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR ALL THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FURTHER CONTENDED THAT AFTER OBTAINING CERTIFIED COPY THESE APPEALS ARE PREFERRED. THEREFORE WHAT EVER DELAY IN FILING OF THESE APPEALS ARE CAUSED IT WAS UNDER A BONAFIDE B ELIEF AND ALSO FOR THE TIME TAKEN BY THE CIT(A) IN SUPPLYING THE CERTIFIED COPI ES OF THE ORDER. 4. HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEES IN THE LIGHT OF AFORESAID FACTUAL MATRIX WE ARE OF THE VI EW THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF THESE APPEALS WAS CAUSED UNDER A BONAFIDE BELIEF T HEREFORE IT SHOULD BE CONDONED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. WE ACCORDINGL Y CONDONE THE SAME AND ADMIT THESE APPEALS FOR HEARING. 5. SO FAR AS ISSUES ON MERIT ARE CONCERNED WE HAVE ALREADY TAKEN A VIEW IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 05-06 THAT THE INTEREST U/S 201(1A) CAN ALSO BE CHARGED EVEN THE DATE OF PA YMENT OF TDS WAS UNKNOWN TO THE ASSESSEES. THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L DATED 28.7.2010 WAS RECTIFIED BY THE TRIBUNAL VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 7.9. 2010 MODIFYING THE DIRECTION OF CIT(A) AND ISSUED THE DIRECTION TO THE A.O. TO E XAMINE THE ISSUE OF CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST U/S 201 IN ACCORDANCE WIT H LAW AFTER AFFORDING AN ITA 517 TO 522 OF 10 KRISHNA DIST. COOP CENT. BANK LTD VJA 3 OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESEES. THE RE LEVANT OBSERVATION OF THE TRIBUNAL ARE EXTRACTED HEREUNDER: HAVING CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF THE LOWER A UTHORITIES IN THE LIGHT OF RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE ARE OF THE VI EW THAT U/S 194A AN OBLIGATION IS CAST UPON THE DEDUCTOR TO DEDUCT T HE TDS AT THE TIME OF CREDIT OF INTEREST INCOME TO THE ACCOUNT OF PAYEE OR AT THE TIME OF PAYMENT THEREOF IN CASH OR BY ISSUE OF CHEQ UE OR DRAFT OR BY ANY OTHER MODE. SECTION 201(1A) DEALS WITH THE CONSEQUENCES ON NON-DEDUCTION OF TDS BY THE DEDUCTOR ON PAYMENTS AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 194A OF THE ACT. AS PER PROV ISIONS OF SECTION 1A OF SECTION 201 IF ANY PERSON PRINCIPLE OFFICER OR COMPANY AS IS REFERRED TO IN THAT SUB-SECTION DOES NOT DEDUCT THE WHOLE OR IN PART OF THE TAX OR AFTER DEDUCTING FAILS TO PAY THE TAX AS REQUIRED BY OR UNDER THIS ACT HE OR IT SHALL BE LIABLE TO PAY SIM PLE INTEREST AT A PRESCRIBED RATE ON THE AMOUNT OF SUCH TAX FROM THE DATE ON WHICH SUCH TAX WAS DEDUCTIBLE TO THE DATE ON WHICH SUCH T AX IS ACTUALLY PAID. IT HAS NOT RELEVANCE WHETHER THE DEDUCTEE IS SUBJECT TO PAYMENT OF TAX OR HE HAS PAID THE TAX OR NOT. IN T HE LIGHT OF THESE PROVISIONS WE DO NOT FIND FORCE IN THE ARGUMENT OF THE ASSESSEE THAT WHERE THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF THE TDS WAS UNKNO WN INTEREST U/S 201(1A) WAS NOT CHARGEABLE. WE HAVE CAREFULLY EXAMINED THE ORDER OF CIT(A) AND WE FIND THAT HE HAS ADJUDICATED THE ISSUE IN THE LIGHT OF JUDGEMENT OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CAS E OF M/S. HINDUSTAN COCA COLA BEVERAGE PRIVATE LIMITED VS. CI T 293 ITR 226. SINCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN HIS ORDER WE CONFIRM THE SAME IN ALL APPEALS. ORDER IN M.A.: IN THE LIGHT OF RATIO LAID DOWN IN THE AFORESAID J UDGEMENTS WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS GIVEN A SP ECIFIC FINDING WHICH CANNOT BE REVIEWED UNDER THE GARB OF RECTIFIC ATION. SO FAR AS DIRECTION OF CIT(A) TO IMPOSE INTEREST U/S 201 ARE CONCERNED WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT IT IS NOT AN ENHANCEMENT OF TH E INCOME OF THE ASSESSEES. IT IS MERE A DIRECTION TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH CAN BE COMPLIED WITH AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEES. WE HOWEVER IN THE INTEREST OF JUST ICE MODIFY THE DIRECTION OF THE CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE ASSESSING OF FICER TO EXAMINE THE ISSUE OF CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST U/S 201 IN A CCORDANCE WITH THE LAW AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD T O THE ASSESSEES. 6. SINCE WE HAVE TAKEN A PARTICULAR VIEW IN SIMILAR SET OF FACTS WE FIND NO REASON TO TAKE A CONTRARY VIEW IN THESE APPEALS. W E ACCORDINGLY FOLLOWING THE AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DIRECT THE ASS ESSING OFFICER TO EXAMINE ITA 517 TO 522 OF 10 KRISHNA DIST. COOP CENT. BANK LTD VJA 4 THE ISSUE OF CHARGEABILITY OF INTEREST U/S 201(1A) IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AFTER AFFORDING AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSE SSEES. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES ARE PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.3.2011 SD/- SD/- (BR BASKA RAN) (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER VG/SPS VISAKHAPATNAM DATED 11 TH MARCH 2011 COPY TO 1 KRISHNA DIST. CO - OP. CENTRAL BANK LTD. CHANDARLAPADU C/O CH. PRAMO DH 1 ST FLOOR 11-62-113 CANAL ROAD VIJAYAWADA-520 001. 2 KRISHNA DIST. CO - OP. CENTRAL BANK LTD. VATSAVAI C/O CH. PRAMODH 1 ST FLOOR 11-62-113 CANAL ROAD VIJAYAWADA-520 001. 3 KRISHNA DIST. CO - OP. CENTRAL BANK LTD. JAGGAIAHPET C/O CH. PRAMODH 1 ST FLOOR 11-62-113 CANAL ROAD VIJAYAWADA-520 001. 4 KRISHNA DIST. CO - OP. CENTRAL BANK LTD. PENUGANCHIPROLU C/O CH. PRA MODH 1 ST FLOOR 11-62-113 CANAL ROAD VIJAYAWADA-520 001. 5 ITO TDS VIJAYAWADA 6 THE CI T VIJAYAWADA 7 THE CIT (A) VIJAYAWADA 8 THE DR ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM. 9 GUARD FILE. BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM