TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2003 (4) TMI 238
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....O processed the return under s. 143(1)(a) and allowed refund of Rs. 8,78,440. Credit for TDS of Rs. 8,05,910 was allowed. Thereafter, the assessee moved an application under s. 154 stating therein that assessee had claimed a refund of Rs. 13,28,889, but the AO had allowed refund of Rs. 8,05,910. Thus, the assessee claimed refund of the remaining amount along with interest under s. 244(1A). The AO allowed the refund of Rs. 6,64,750 including interest of Rs. 2,40,694 under s. 244(1A) vide his order dt. 30th Aug., 1994. Subsequently, the AO noticed that credit for TDS certificates of Rs. 3,09,377 and Rs. 31,728 aggregating to Rs. 3,41,105 had been allowed on incomplete TDS certificates. This defect was pointed out to the assessee who corrected....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... filed the corrected certificates on 1st Oct., 1993. Similarly, vide order under s. 154, dt. 28th Aug., 1995, by mistake, credit of two improper certificates amounting to Rs. 26,393 was allowed and the corrected certificates were filed on 2nd July, 1995. Therefore, the appellant was squarely responsible for filing incomplete and defective TDS certificates due to which refunds could not be issued in time. It is, therefore, held that delay in issue of refunds of Rs. 3,41,105 and Rs. 26,393 was attributable to the appellant and accordingly the action of the AO in allowing interest under ss. 244(1A) and 244A amounting to Rs. 37,520 and Rs. 7,125 for the period prior to 1st Oct., 1993 and 2nd July, 1995, respectively, vide orders under s. 154, d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rdingly, the appeal is dismissed." Assessee is aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) and hence this appeal before us. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee, Shri M.L. Sharma, submitted that tax was deducted at source and paid to the Government account in the financial year relevant to assessment year under reference. The assessee was entitled to interest under s. 244A from 1st April, 1992, till the grant of refund. The mere fact that the party responsible for deduction of tax at source had issued defective certificates does not mean that the assessee could be penalised for this lapse. He also drew our attention to provisions of s. 244A(2), which provides that the AO can exclude the period of delay attributable to the assessee for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IT Act. 6. We have heard both the parties and carefully considered the rival submissions. From the facts discussed above, it is obvious that interest under s. 244A was allowed by the AO on assessee's application filed under s. 154. Subsequently, interest was withdrawn for the reason that four of the TDS certificates filed by the assessee were defective and the delay in filing the correct certificates was attributable to the assessee. No doubt, sub-s. (2) of s. 244A empowers the AO to deny interest where the delay is attributable to the assessee. However, in a case where dispute arises for the period to be excluded, it shall be decided by the CIT/Chief CIT whose decision thereon shall be final. Now, in response to notice under s. 154, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. 11. In view of above discussion and the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any reason to interfere with the orders of the CIT(A) which are confirmed." Thus, it has been held that AO had no jurisdiction to exclude the alleged period of delay attributable to the assessee without referring the matter to CIT/Chief CIT. In the present case, the AO has not made any reference to the CIT/Chief CIT. Therefore, respectfully following the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the order of the CIT(A) requires to be set aside on this ground itself. 6.1 Even otherwise, it is not in dispute that tax in fact was deducted at source and paid the same to the Government account during the financial year itself. As per th....