TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (4) TMI 1480
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....40,55,630 as payable by the appellant. 2. That the "Ld. CIT(A)" erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that the intimation dated 14 December 2013 issued by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad ("Ld. AO") under Section 154 read with Section 200A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") is bad in law. 3. That the "Ld. CIT(A)" erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that the demand raised pursuant to processing of statement of tax deduction at source under section 200A was erroneous to the extent such demand did not arise on account of any arithmetical error in the statement or an incorrect claim apparent from any information in the statement and therefore such could not be raised under the provis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of deduction of taxes by appellant on payments to the payees. 7. That the "Ld. CIT(A)" erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that appellant should not be considered to be an assessee in default' in accordance with the first proviso to section 201 (1) of the Act. 7.1 The "Ld. CIT(A)" erred in facts and in law in upholding the order of the Ld. AO, without having due regard to the fact that the appellant has duly furnished Annexure A to Form 26A obtained from the payee in accordance with the provisions of first proviso to section 201(1) of the Act. 8. That the "Ld. CIT(A)" erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that the demand is raised without conducting verification whether payee has paid taxes on t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....30/-. Against this rectification order, the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A), where the assessee submitted detailed reply that the Assessing Officer had issued LTDC u/s. 197 which has been cancelled in respect of following three parties and their LTDC were cancelled by the Assessing Officer, the information of which was not available on ITD Website. Therefore, the assessee deducted lower tax : Name of the party Amount of TDS demand (Rs.) Mumbai International Airport Ltd. (PAN: AAECM6285C) 35,51,501/- Ram Krishna Travels Pvt. Ltd. PAN: AABCR1016M 510/- The Federal Travel and Tour Pvt. Ltd. PAN : AADCT9952C 26,003/- Total 35,78,014/- The ld. CIT(A) gave direction to the Assessing Officer to verif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....liable for TDS, the interest cannot be waived off u/s. 201(1A) of the Act. Interest is compensatory in nature and therefore, the assessee shall be treated as assessee in default. 5. After hearing both the sides and perusing the materials available on record, we are of the opinion that before reaching to any definite conclusion in this appeal, various aspects of the case need verification at the stage of Assessing Officer. With reference to ground No. 6, the assessee has taken a plea that online facility for verification of validity of LTDC was not functional at the time of deduction of taxes by the appellant on payments to the payees and therefore, the assessee cannot be termed as assessee in default. This fact needs verification to asce....