TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (8) TMI 408
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d in violation of provisions of section 194A read with section 197A. 2. The Ld. CIT(A), Rohtak has erred in accepting the contentions of the assessee that it had not wilfully or contumaciously acted in disregard of law and the mistake was bonafide, and giving relief accordingly to the assessee because assessee had not deducted the TDS in the cases where interest paid / credited during the year under consideration was in excess of maximum amount which is not chargeable to income tax. As discussed in the para 8 of the AO's order, the assessee did not reply in this regard which shows that the conduct of the assessee is not acceptable. 3. That the appellant craves for permission to add, delete or amend the grounds of appeal before or at t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... been deducted in all cases where interest exceeding Rs, 10,000/- has been paid/credited. The assessee PR replied that TDS has not been deducted in all the cases as they have furnished them Form No. 15G/15H. Further he submitted that he will produce the copies of Form No. 15G/15H for the year under consideration on 6.9.2011. It was also submitted that Form No. 15G/15H for the Financial year 2010-11 were submitted to the O/o CIT, Rohtak in April, 2011 Vide show cause notice No. ITO/TDS/Survey/2011-12/2702 dated 24.1.2012, the assessee PR was again asked to show cause as to why he may not be treated as an assessee in default uls 201 (1) of the I. T. Act 1961 for non-deduction of tax at source on interest payments to different persons for viol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ak vide his impugned order dated 25.11.2014 has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. During the hearing, Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the AO and reiterated the contentions raised in the grounds of appeal filed by the Department and requested that the Appeal of the Revenue may be allowed. 6. On the contrary, Ld. Authorised Representative of the Assessee relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and stated that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the following cases and requested that by following the same, the Appeal of the Revenue may be dismissed. - 145 ITD 370 (Mum) Karwat Steel Traders vs. ITO - 46 SOT 71 (Mum) Vipin P. Meht....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that cannot be taken as a ground not to admit the same. I, therefore, admit the additional evidence filed by the appellant in the interest of justice. As far as late submissions of Form No 15G/15H is concerned, it is apparent that in the present case, the appellant did not wilfully or contumaciously act in disregard of its objection 'under law. The mistake was bonafide and no loss to revenue occurred for failure to file the same. However, a perusal of the list of interest payments reveals that the appellant was liable for payment of Rs. 1,88,250/- plus interest of Rs. 23444.10 on A/c of Form No. 15G/H obtained in cases where interest paid was in excess of amount not chargeable to tax. The addition is restricted to Rs. 1,88,250/-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of revenue had occurred on this account the default committed by the assessee in not filing Form No. 15H received by it from various depositors within the stipulated period, was only of technical nature for which no penalty under section 272A(2)(f) of the Act was leviable. In support of its conclusions, the Tribunal placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Ltd. v State of Orissa [1972] 83 ITR 26. Having perused the order of the Tribunal, we are satisfied that in the light of the factual position stated by the Tribunal, no case for interference is made out. It is clear that the default in the present case is merely of technical or venial in nature." 7.2 I also find that Revenue has not challenged the admissi....