TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 772
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vey under section 133A was conducted on 15.02.2010 to verify the compliance with the provisions of Chapter XVII-B of the Act, with reference to TDS. The Project Director of DRDA, Kadapa is the Drawing and Disbursing Officer. As part of rural development activity for promotion of rural economy, DRDA was formed and one of the activities being education of rural unemployment youth in Computers and Electronics Systems. It entered into contacts with various Government and non Government agencies. For this activity, assessee deducted tax at 2.261% on the payments made under the agreements. A.O. however, was of the view that the payments to faculty from M/s. CMD Ltd., Keerthi Infotech, Mr. V. Institute of Excellence and Skylark Infoways Pvt. Ltd. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Making and Computer Accounting respectively. On an examination it is seen that TDS is attracted in payments made to all the four parties, the details of which are in the body of the order under section 201(1) and 201(1A). In the meanwhile, the AR took the plea that in case the recipient paid advance tax on his total income including the amounts paid by the appellant, in that case TDS need not be made, thus answering the obligation under section 201(1); with particular reference to Apex Court's Coco Cola case but in respect of 201(1A), liability it is till the date of 140A payments. In light of the Coco Cola Case, as per the information furnished by the AR, there is no liability under section 201(1) in the first three cases, inasmuch as the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....espect of one deductee only. 4. The respondent deducted taxes at source for contract work of imparting training to beneficiaries u/s 194C of IT Act and after receiving proper advice deducted u/s 194J at higher rates and paid taxes. 5. The appellant has attached the bank account of the respondent under section 226(3) on 24th Jan. 2012 and obtained bank draft for Rs.989553 being the total demand." 6. At the time of hearing none appeared on behalf of the assessee but assessee has filed written submissions on record by their letter dated 11.01.2013 which was considered after hearing the learned D.R. 7. The first ground raised by the Revenue is that the order passed by the CIT(A), Guntur is without jurisdiction as the appeal has to b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder section 156 should specify, in case assessee is aggrieved on the order, to whom assessee should prefer the appeal. In the absence of any specification in that notice, the assessee might have preferred the appeal to CIT, Guntur under whose territorial jurisdiction it is functioning, as the cases of CIT, Guntur/ Tirupati were assigned to CIT(A), Guntur. Further, when the appeal memo was filed before the CIT(A), Guntur, he sends the copy of the appeal memo to the A.O. for examination of the contents therein. There is no objection at that point of time by A.O. before the CIT(A) about the jurisdiction. Having preferred the appeal and having entertained by the CIT(A), Guntur, it is too late in the day to raise the issue of jurisdiction. It i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ranted partly by the A.O. without examining the facts. As far as the assessee's short deduction of tax in the case of Mr. V Institute of Excellence is concerned, that is only Rs.6876/- whereas, consequential order confirms the amount to the extent of Rs.1,65,750/-. This require reexamination by the A.O. The levy of interest also, even though not stated exactly, ultimately amount confirmed seems to be Rs.35,583/- on which assessee seems to have no grievance. Further, assessee has raised two objections in the cross objections - that the A.O. attached the bank account on 24th January, 2012 i.e., after the CIT(A) has passed the order giving relief, without giving effect to the consequential order and recovered an amount of Rs. 9,89,553/-. As pe....