M/s The Chief Manager (PR), Shimla v. ITO (TDS), Shimla

ITA 767/CHANDI/2014 | 2010-2011
Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2014 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 76721514 RSA 2014
Assessee PAN AAACP0165G
Bench Chandigarh
Appeal Number ITA 767/CHANDI/2014
Duration Of Justice 2 month(s) 16 day(s)
Appellant M/s The Chief Manager (PR), Shimla
Respondent ITO (TDS), Shimla
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 18-11-2014
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 18-11-2014
Assessment Year 2010-2011
Appeal Filed On 02-09-2014
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SOOD ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 767 768 769 & 770/CHD/2014 A.YS 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 & 2013-14 THE CHIEF MANAGER (PR) V I.T.O (TDS) PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK SHIMLA LIFT ROAD SHIMLA AAACP 0165G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.K. MITT AL DATE OF HEARING 17.11.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 18.11 .2014 O R D E R PER T.R. SOOD A.M THESE APPEALS ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) SHIMLA DATED 23.7.2014. 2. IN THESE APPEALS THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOL LOWING GROUNDS: 1 THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES O F THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER IN PASSING ORDER U/ S 201(1)/201(1A) OF IT ACT RAISING A DEMAND OF RS. 205 859/- (A.Y 20 10-11) RS. 62 41 171/- (A.Y 2011-12) RS. 22 02 407/- (A.Y 20 12-13) AND RS. 830 228/- (A.Y 2013-14). 2 THAT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO DEDUCT TDS ON THE INTEREST PAYMENTS U/S 194A AND IMPUGNED DEMAND HAS BEEN RAISED BY RECORDING INCORRECT FACTS AND FINDINGS AND BY DISREGARDING THE SUBMISSIONS OF EH ASSESSEE. 3 THAT IN ANY VIEW OF THE MATTER AND IN ANY CASE T HE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S 201(1)/201(1A) IS ILLEGAL ARBITRARY AGAINST THE PR INCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE VOID AB INITIO AND THEREFORE DESERVES TO B E QUASHED. 3 AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES WE FIND THAT A TDS SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED IN THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE. DURI NG THE 2 COURSE OF TDS INSPECTION IT WAS NOTICED THAT THE AS SESSEE BANK WAS HAVING FDRS OF HIMACHAL PRADESH GRAM SADAK DEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUT TAX WAS NOT DEDUCTED. ON EN QUIRY IT WAS EXPLAINED THAT THE AGENCY WAS REGISTERED U/S 12 A AND THEREFORE THE INCOME WAS NOT TAXABLE AND ACCORDINGL Y NO TAX WAS REQUIRED TO BE DEDUCTED IN THE LIGHT OF THE DEC ISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CASE OF HINDUSTAN COCO (P) LTD V. CIT 293 ITR 226. THE ASSESSING OFFICER DID NOT FIN D FORCE IN THESE SUBMISSIONS AND HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS IN DEFAULT AND DETERMINED THE LIABILITY OF TAX AS WELL AS INTE REST U/S 201(1) AND 201(1A) OF IT ACT. 4 ON APPEAL THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER WERE REITERATED. RELIANCE WAS PLACED ON THE DECISION OF JAIPUR BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ITO V. STAT E BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR AND ALSO IN CASE OF ITO (TDS) V STATE BANK OF PATIALA BY CHANDIGARH BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT FROM SUCH AGENCY NO TAX IS REQUIRED TO BE DEDUCTED U/S 194A(3)(III)(F). HOWEVER THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT F IND FORCE IN THE SAME AND DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE ASSESSEE . 5 BEFORE US THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE RELI ED ON THE DECISION OF CHANDIGARH BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CAS E OF ITO V. STATE BANK OF PATIALA 146 ITD 497 (CHANDIGARH) AND DECISION OF JAIPUR BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN CASE OF ITO V. B RANCH MANAGER STATE BANK OF BIKANER AND JAIPUR. 6 ON THE OTHER HAND THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE SU PPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 7 AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS WE FIND T HAT IN CASE OF ITO V. STATE BANK OF PATIALA 146 ITD 497 ( CHANDIGARH) (SUPRA) IT WAS HELD AS UNDER: 3 SECTION 194A CLEARLY SHOWS THAT THERE WAS NO REQUI REMENT FOR ISSUING INDIVIDUAL INSTRUCTIONS BY THE CENTRAL GOVT BECAUSE CLAUSE (F) TALKS ABOUT PARTICULAR TYPES OF INSTITUTIONS. T HE REASON FOR THIS IS THAT THE GOVERNMENT MIGHT HAVE DECIDED THAT WHER EVER VARIOUS FUNDS ARE BEING PROVIDED TO VARIOUS SOCIETIES OR TR USTS FOR SPECIFIED SCHEMES THAT SINCE FUNDS BELONG TO THE G OVT AND CAN BE USED ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF A PARTICULAR PROJECT THERE WAS NO REASON TO DEDUCT THE TAX BECAUSE SUCH SOCIETIES ARE BEING FUNDED BY THE GOV T ON 100% BASIS. THE NOTIFICATION NO. SO 34589 DATED 22.10.1970 ISSUED U/S 194A (III) (F) MENTIONS VARI OUS SOCIETIES. THIS WOULD SHOW THAT SOCIETIES WHICH ARE BEING WHOL LY FUNDED BY THE GOVT WOULD QUALIFY FOR NON DEDUCTION OF TAX. IT HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTED THAT THE SAID SOCIETIES ARE NOT WHOLLY FIN ANCED BY THE CENTRAL GOVT. ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AFFIRMED. ABOVE SHOWS THAT THE ISSUE IS TOTALLY COVERED IN FA VOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY WE DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAV OUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 8 IN THE RESULT ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AR E ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.11.2014 SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 18.11.2014 SURESH COPY TO: THE APPELLANT/THE RESPONDENT/THE CIT/THE C IT(A)/THE DR