TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (11) TMI 1057
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f convenience and brevity. The grounds as well as facts narrated in ITA No.246/SRT/2019 for assessment year 2009-10 have been taken into consideration for deciding these appeals en masse. 3. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee in "lead" case in ITA No.246/SRT/2019, are as follows: "1. Whether, on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. Assessing Officer has erred in levying demand of tax and interest of Rs.1,54,368/- u/s 201(1) r.w.s. 201(1A) of the Act?" 4. The assessee vide its application dated 04.11.2022 has raised additional grounds, on legal issue, which are reproduced below: "1. Para 1 request for admitting the new ground of appeal, if any: For the grounds of appeal, we understand that the same are covered by the grounds which were raised earlier in the first appeal, thus, the same can be heard by the Hon'ble ITAT also. Para 1.1 judicial discipline for admitting question of law as additional ground of appeal- Without prejudice to what has been stated above and also as abandon caution, we also would like to request your honor that otherwise also if facts are available on record then question of law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....merit and is likely to succeeds in case both the appeals are admitted for consideration on merit. The assessee suffers irreparable loss if the assessee will not get any benefit in filing the appeals rather there is always chance of dismissal of appeal for technical reasons. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that considering the aforesaid factual backgrounds and keeping in view that delays were neither intentional nor deliberate therefore, the same may be condoned. To support his submission, Ld. AR for the assessee relied upon the following decisions of Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order of co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal: (i) N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy AIR [1998] 7 SC 124 (SC) (ii) Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) (iii) State Bank of India vs. JCIT(TDS), Surat [ITA No.50-58 and 73-77/SRT/2019 7. On the other hand, Ld. Senior Departmental Representative (Sr.DR) for the Revenue strongly objected against the submissions made by Ld. AR for the assessee. Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue submits that if the assessee could file both the appeals before Ld. CIT(A)/First Appellate Authority after taking all similar ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n leading to adjudication of additional grounds are emanating from the various dates and facts available in the orders of lower authorities. The additional ground of appeal is legal in nature. 10. On the other hand, Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue submits that no such ground of appeal was raised by assessee before First Appellate Authority / Ld. CIT(A), therefore such additional ground of appeal may not be admitted. 11. In short rejoinder submission, Ld. AR for the assessee submits that additional ground of appeal goes to the root of the case and as such no new fact is required to be brought on record. The legal plea can be raised at any stage if it goes to the root of the case. 12. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the nature of additional ground of appeal. We find that the assessee has raised purely legal issue, which goes to the root of the matter and no further facts are to be brought on record and all the facts are emanating from the record of lower authority. Therefore, in the light of ratio laid down by the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Thermal Power Corporation vs. CIT (1998) 229 ITR 382 (SC), we admit the addi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 22253 4 Sanskruti 160865 16087 0 16087 Total 83413 83442 0 8342 16. The Assessing Officer also worked out the interest @ 1% per month till passing the order and worked out interest of Rs.70,926/-. Thus total demand of Rs.1,54,368/- was credited vide order dated 30.03.2016. 17. Aggrieved by the order of Assessing Officer / DCIT(TDS), the assessee filed an appeal before Ld. CIT(A). Before Ld. CIT(A) the assessee filed its written submission, which recorded in page-6 of the order of Ld. CIT(A). In the submission, the assessee stated that assessee is a Government Public Sector Bank, engaged in the banking activities. The assessee-bank takes deposits from its customers and also provided loan and other banking services to its customers. The Assessing Officer / DCIT(TDS) done a spot verification on Deputy Zonal Manager Office, Bank of India, Ghod Dod Road, Surat on 29.02.2016. During the course of verification various anomalies from the record, it was found that the bank statement as taken fixed deposits interest from any customers and has not deducted TDS in the financial year exceeding the basic exemption. The assessee further stated t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....orm No.26Q for assessment year in the following manner: - Financial year Quarter Form No. Provisional receipt No. Date of filing 2008-09 Q1 26Q 023550200027340 15.07.2008 2008-09 Q2 26Q 023550200054356 27.10.2008 2008-09 Q3 26Q 023550200074553 30.10.2009 2008-09 Q4 26Q 023550200102262 22.05.2009 20. On the basis of aforesaid detailed contention, the Ld. AR for the assessee submits even for the purpose of collecting tax at source, the time period for passing order under section 201, the limitation period is prescribed under section 201(3) of the Act, at the relevant time, wherein statement in the prescribed form was furnished, the time limit was two years from the end of financial year in which statement under section 200 was furnished. The assessee-bank furnished last statement of TDS other than salary for financial year 2008-09 is on 22.05.2009. Thus Assessing Officer / DCIT(TDS) was required to pass order on or before 31.03.2012. The Assessing Officer / DCIT(TDS) has passed order under section 200(1) on 30.03.2016, which is apparently beyond the time limit prescribed under 200(3)(i). The Ld. AR for the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., since the assessee-bank is revising its own statement and it was lastly revised on 04.05.2021. Therefore, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer / DCIT(TDS) in the year 2016 is well within the time and cannot be treated as barred by period of limitation. 23. In rejoinder, the Ld. AR for the assessee submits that assessee-bank made a minor rectification in such statement which has no material bearing on the amount of tax liability or TDS with the Revenue which are the amount of correction carried out is also not the material and are quite negligible. Such fact is asserted by assessee-bank itself while making such submission. The Ld. AR for the assessee further submits that ITAT Mumbai Benches in the case of Sodexo SVC India Pvt. Ltd (supra) while considering the similar submission of Revenue has held that such corrections are minor negligible and definite period passing the order under section 201(1) / 201(1A) cannot be revised. 24. We have considered the rival submission of both the parties and have gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We have also deliberated on various case law relied by the Ld. AR for the assessee. We find that statement ....