2018 (6) TMI 418

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s to be cancelled. 1.2 The order passed u/s 201 (1J/201 (1 A) by Additional CIT (TDS), Ghaziabad is without jurisdiction, as the appellant is centrally registered for all TDS compliances and holds centralised TANs (for its Central office, Registered office, all India branches/offices) with Mumbai TDS Range. 2.1 It is submitted that the payees are statutory body constituted under Uttar Pradesh state Act and eligible for TDS exemption u/s 194A (3) (iii(f) under CBDT Notification No. 3489 dated 22-10-1970. 2.2 The learned CIT (A) has erred in law that (a) The case of appellant is squarely covered by favourable order of Hon'ble Delhi Tribunal in the case of Canara Bank (ITA No. 1359/Del/2014) dated 7th August 2015. The said order has duly considered the Allahabad High Court ruling dated 28thFebruary 2011 in writ petition filed by NOIDA, holding that NOIDA is not a 'local authority'. The Tribunal held that there was no obligation for the bank to deduct tax on interest paid on fixed deposits to NOIDA since NOIDA was notified u/s. 194A(3) (iii) (f) vide CBDT Notification no. 3489 dated 22nd October 1970. This was a ground independent of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cepted by the Tax Department. 2.3. It is submitted that (a) (a) TDS provision is tax collection machinery, is not charging section, is subordinate to charge of tax u/s 4 r.w.s. 5. The Department is not justified, in the peculiar circumstances, effectively shifting charge of tax on the payer bank, when the payee authorities are State Government statutory bodies and holding PAN. The payees in this case are in existence and in the knowledge and radar of the Department since more than 10 years, are primarily responsible to pay correct tax due, if any. (b) The Writ Petition jurisdiction challenged by the payee Authority before Hon. Allahabad HC (order dated 28-2-2011) was concerned primarily with the issue whether Noida is a local authority within the meaning of section 10(20) r.w. Notice u/s 142(1) requiring it to file its Return of Income (ROI). It is, therefore, submitted that order passed u/s 201 (1) and section 201 (1 A) be cancelled. The appellant craves leave to add, to alter and/or to amend all or any of the grounds of appeal." 3. The facts for both the appeals are identical therefore, we are taking up the facts of A.Y. 2013-14. During the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Authority as has been held by the Allahabad High Court dated 28.02.2011. Hence, TDS provisions are applicable in the case of Noida Authority. Unless a certificate u/s 197 from the department is produced by the authority, banks are liable to deduct tax at source on payment of interest to the authority. As per Section 194 A of the I.T. Act, 1961 and board notification bank was liable to deduct the tax at source on interest payment credited to Greater Noida Authority. However, bank has failed to deduct the same and pay to the Central Govt. without verifying the applicability of above referred notification from the Income Tax Department. The status of Greater Noida Authority as Local Authority has also not been accepted by Hon'ble High Court Allahabad in Writ Petition Tax No. 1338 of 2005 vide order dated 28.02.2011. Therefore the assessee bank has to deduct TDS on payment of interest on FDRs to Gr. Noida Authority and pay to the Central Govt. Account. However, the assessee has not followed the provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee did not deduct TDS on payment of interest on FDRs on the basis of the letter provided by the Gr. Noida Authority, while TDS should be deducted on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1355/Del/2014 07/08/2015 Add. CIT(TDS) Vs. State Bank of Patiala 7 1357 & 1358/Del/2014 07/08/2015 Add. CIT(TDS) Vs. The Corporation Bank 8 1363 & 1374/Del/2014 07/08/2015 Add. CIT(TDS) Vs. Vijaya Bank The facts of this case are exactly the same as were in above cited appeals and therefore this case is fully covered in favour of the assessee bank by the aforesaid judgments of this Tribunal which are fully relied upon by the assessee Bank. The Ld AR submitted that the CIT-A brushed-aside the binding precedent of jurisdictional Tribunal confirmed the order of the Addl. CIT (TDS). The answer to the observation of the CIT-A has already been addressed by the Tribunal in ITA 5968 to 5974/Del/2015 in case of Central Bank of India Vs Addl. CIT(TDS). The Ld. AR pointed out that the Order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 1359/Del/2014 dated 07-08-2015 in Addl. CIT (TDS) vs. Canara Bank, stood confirmed, approved and upheld by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) and another Vs Canara Bank [2016] 386 ITR 504 (All) and therefore all the premise, observations and comments of the Id. CIT-A in his impugned order, under app....