The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bareilly v. Life Insurance Corporation of India, Bareilly

ITA 609/LKW/2014 | 2005-2006
Pronouncement Date: 10-11-2014 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 60923714 RSA 2014
Bench Lucknow
Appeal Number ITA 609/LKW/2014
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 30 day(s)
Appellant The Income Tax Officer (TDS), Bareilly
Respondent Life Insurance Corporation of India, Bareilly
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 10-11-2014
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 10-11-2014
Date Of Final Hearing 21-10-2014
Next Hearing Date 21-10-2014
Assessment Year 2005-2006
Appeal Filed On 11-07-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH B LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.609/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06 INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) BAREILLY V. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA CITY BRANCH OFFICE-II BAREILLY PAN/PAN:LKNL05036D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) C.O. NO.34/LKW/2014 [IN ITA NO.609/LKW/2014] ASSESSMENT YEAR:2005-06 LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA CITY BRANCH OFFICE-II BAREILLY V. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) BAREILLY PAN/PAN:LKNL05036D (CROSS-OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) DEPARTMENT BY: SHRI. O. N. PATHAK D.R. ASSESSEE BY: SHRI. J. J. MEHRTORA C.A DATE OF HEARING: 21 10 2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 10 11 2014 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV: THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) INTER ALIA ON VARIOUS GROUNDS WHICH ARE AS UNDER:- 1. THE LD. CIT (APPEAL) BAREILLY HAS ERRED IN FACTS AND LAW BY ACCEPTING NEW EVIDENCE FROM THE DEDUCTOR WITHOUT ALLOWING REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE AO IN TERMS OF RULE 46A (3) OF THE IT RULES 1962. THE DEDUCTOR SUBMITTED BEFORE THE CIT (A) THAT HE HAS DEDUCTED AND PAID THE DUE TAX AND THAT SHORT DEDUCTION/ NON- :- 2 -: PAYMENT IS DUE TO MISMATCH. THIS FACT WAS NEITHER PRODUCED BEFORE THE AO NOR IT WAS REFLECTED ON THE LTD SYSTEM WHEN THIS ORDER U/S 201(1)/20I (1A) WAS PASSED. THE CIT (A) HAS ERONIOUSLY ACCEPTED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE AND DIRECTED THE AO TO VERIFY THE CLAIM BY CALLING FOR NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND REVISE THE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. 2. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING THE AO TO CALL FOR NECESSARY DOCUMENTS FOR REQUIRED VERIFICATION AND REVISE THE ORDER ACCORDINGLY. THE PROCESSING OF TDS STATEMENTS ARE FULLY CENTRALIZED AT CPC (TDS) VAISHALI GHAZIABAD AND THE AO HAS NO POWER TO REVISE THE ORDER. THE ONLY REMEDY FOR THE DEDUCTOR IS TO FILE CORRECTION STATEMENTS ON-LINE AND GET THE DEMAND REDUCED THROUGH CPC(TDS). 3. THE CIT(A) BEING A QUASI-JUDICIAL BODY HAS ERRED FURTHER IN DIRECTING THE AO(TDS) TO CARRY OUT RECTIFICATIONS WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING THE PROCESS OF RECTIFICATION/CORRECTIONS LAID DOWN BY CPC(TDS). NO PROOF HAS BEEN SUBMITTED BY THE DEDUCTOR BEFORE THE CIT(A) TO SHOW THAT THE NECESSARY CORRECTION STATEMENTS HAVE BEEN FILED WITH CPC(TDS). THE CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE EXAMINED ACTUAL PROCESSES LAID DOWN BY THE DEPARTMENT BEFORE ISSUING DIRECTIONS AND WHETHER SUCH DIRECTIONS ARE EXECUTABLE OR NOT. 4. BY DOING SO IN 1 2 3 ABOVE THE CIT (A) HAS MECHANICALLY DISPOSED OFF THE APPEAL WHILE NO IMPLEMENTATION OF HIS DIRECTIONS ARE POSSIBLE AT A.O. (TDS) END. IN CASE OF MISMATCH THE REMEDY LIES IN FILING OF CORRECTION STATEMENT WHICH ARE AUTOMATICALLY PROCESSED BY THE CPC (TDS). TILL CORRECTION STATEMENT IS PROCESSED THE AO(TDS) 6RDER STANDS AND CANNOT BE CANCELLED. 2. IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED CROSS OBJECTION. 3. THE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT RECTIFICATION CANNOT BE DONE BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) AS IT CAN ONLY BE PERMITTED TO BE DONE BY THE :- 3 -: ASSESSEE. THEREFORE NO FRUITFUL PURPOSE WOULD BE SERVED BY SENDING THE MATTER TO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS). 4. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE HAS INVITED OUR ATTENTION TO THE FACT THAT TDS WAS DEDUCTED AND PAID IN TIME BUT ON ACCOUNT OF MISMATCH THE DUE CREDIT WAS NOT GIVEN. WHEN THE MATTER WAS BROUGHT BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) THE LD. CIT(A) HAS REMANDED THE MATTER BACK TO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO MAKE NECESSARY VERIFICATION AND TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE INSTEAD OF VERIFYING THE FACTS HIMSELF. 5. HAVING GIVEN A THOUGHTFUL CONSIDERATION TO THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND FROM VERIFICATION FROM THE CIT (TDS) IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT IF ANY ERROR IS CAUSED IN DEPOSITING THE TAX OR CREDIT OF TDS ON ACCOUNT OF MISMATCH OR FOR ANY OTHER REASON RECTIFICATION CAN BE SUBMITTED ONLINE BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY AND NOT BY ANY THIRD PERSON. NOWADAYS THE RETURNS ARE BEING SUBMITTED ONLINE WITH THE CENTRAL AGENCIES OF THE DEPARTMENT AND IF ANY MISMATCH IS THERE DUE TO ANY REASON THE CREDIT OF TDS IS NOT GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE AND DEMANDS ARE BEING RAISED. NO DOUBT FOR THE LAPSE ON THE PART OF THE DEPARTMENT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD NOT SUFFER BUT SIDE BY SIDE WHEN RECTIFICATIONS ARE TO BE MADE ONLINE WITH THE SYSTEM BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY RECTIFICATION IS NOT POSSIBLE BY THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) OR THE ASSESSING OFFICER. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES REMANDING THE MATTER BACK TO THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) OR THE ASSESSING OFFICER WOULD NOT SERVE THE PURPOSE. WE ARE THEREFORE OF THE VIEW THAT WHENEVER ANY DEMAND IS RAISED ON ACCOUNT OF MISMATCH OR ANY OTHER ERROR THE ASSESSEE SHOULD SUBMIT RECTIFICATION ONLINE AND GET THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT. EVEN THEN IF IT IS NOT DONE THE ASSESSEE SHOULD DO THE RECTIFICATION UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF THE DEPARTMENTAL OFFICER. THIS SYSTEM WAS GENERATED FOR THE BENEFIT AND CONVENIENCE OF THE ASSESSEE BUT SOME TIME ON ACCOUNT OF MISMATCH CREDIT OF TDS IS NOT BEING GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE BUT FOR THIS THE ASSESSEE SHOULD SUBMIT NECESSARY RECTIFICATION ONLINE. IN THIS BACKDROP WE ARE OF THE VIEW :- 4 -: THAT IN THE INSTANT CASE IT IS NOT CLEAR WHETHER THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED RECTIFICATION ONLINE OR HAS DIRECTLY APPROACHED THE LD. CIT(A). UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT LET THE MATTER BE SENT BACK TO THE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION THAT ASSESSEE WILL SUBMIT A RECTIFICATION ONLINE AFTER DOING NECESSARY CORRECTIONS AND EVEN THEN IF MISMATCH IS NOT RECTIFIED AND CREDIT IS NOT GIVEN THE LD. CIT(A) WOULD GET IT DONE UNDER HIS SUPERVISION HAVING VERIFIED THE RECORDS FROM THE ASSESSEE WITH REGARD TO DEDUCTION OF TDS. ACCORDINGLY WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO GET IT RECTIFIED UNDER HIS SUPERVISION IN TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. 6. THE CROSS OBJECTION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) HAS BECOME INFRUCTUOUS AND HENCE THE SAME IS DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- [A. K. GARODIA] [SUNIL KUMAR YADAV] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED:10 TH NOVEMBER 2014 JJ:2110 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR