TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (4) TMI 858
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....omers. 2. ITA Nos.476, 477, 479, 480 and 481/LKW/2012 are preferred by the Revenue assailing the orders of the ld. CIT(A) raising common grounds, which are as under:- 1. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in holding that section 194 in not applicable in case of provisioning of amounts to interest on FDRs/time deposits on the basis of Board's circular No.03/2010 dated 02/03/2010 ignoring the fact that the circular is applicable only in the case of Core Banking Solutions whereas the case of the assessee in the relevant assessment year was of Non Core Banking Solutions. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in holding that section 194 is not applicable in case of provisioning of amounts to interest on FDRs/ti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal) is Arbitrary, Illegal and Bad in Law Liable to be quashed. 4. In all these assessment years, during the course of survey conducted under section 133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called in short "the Act"), it was noticed that the assessee is a banking company and is engaged in banking business and the bank has paid/credited interest to its customers, but failed to deduct tax at source on the payment of interest. The Assessing Officer accordingly held the assessee to be in default for non-deduction of TDS and made additions accordingly, against which the assessees preferred appeals and in ITA Nos. 476, 477, 479, 480 and 481/LKW/2012, the ld. CIT(A) has allowed relief to the assessee following the Board's Circular No.3/2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ld. D.R. and sought his comments. The ld. D.R., Shri. Alok Mitra has emphatically argued that in the relevant provisions of the Act no time limit is prescribed for initiating the proceedings under sections 201(1), 201(1A) and 206C(7) of the Act, therefore, the orders passed by the Assessing Officer cannot be called to be time barred. Moreover, these orders were passed when the Assessing Officer has noted, during the course of survey, that on all the payments of interest TDS were not deducted by the assessee. The ld. D.R. placed reliance upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT(TDS) vs. H.M.T. Ltd. 340 ITR 219 (P&H) and Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Bhura Exports Ltd. vs. ITO (T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and further the time limit for taking action against the payee under section 147 has also expired. 10. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation [2008] 305 ITR 137 (Delhi) held that the date of knowledge was not relevant for the purposes of exercising jurisdiction in so far as the provisions of the Act were concerned. The time limit of four years prescribed by the Tribunal called for no interference and action was to be initiated by the competent authority under the Act where no limitation was prescribed within the period of four years. The acceptance of liability by the assessee would not by itself extend the period of limitation nor would it extend the reasonable time that was postulated....