TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 448
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... tax liability of Rs. 2,45,595/- by alleging that the appellant is liable for making TCS, which he failed to make either TCS or to file Form no. 27C to concerned CIT within prescribed time limit. The tax liability confirmed is totally unjustified on facts as also in law and may kindly be deleted. 3) The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as also on facts in confirming charging of interest u/s. 206C(7) of the Act at Rs. 1,69,461/-. The interest levied on tax liability determined u/s. 206C(6) is totally unjustified on facts as also in law and may kindly be deleted. 4) Your Honour's appellant craves leave to add, to amend, alter, or withdraw any or more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal." Assessment Year 2014-15:- "1) The grounds of appeal mentioned hereunder are without prejudice to one another. 2) The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] erred in law as also on facts in confirming AO's action of determining tax liability of Rs. 1,96,470/- by alleging that the appellant is liable for making TCS, which he failed to make either TCS or to file Form no.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... interest levied on tax liability determined u/s. 206C(6) is totally unjustified on facts as also in law and may kindly be deleted. 4) Your Honour's appellant craves leave to add, to amend, alter, or withdraw any or more grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal." 3. Since common issues are involved for all the years under consideration, all these appeals are being disposed of by way of a common order. 4. The brief facts of the case are that during the course of proceedings under section 206C of the Act, the AO observed that the assessee is engaged in the business of sale of "scrap". The AO was of the view that assessee is liable for collection of TCS within the provisions of section 206C of the Act and subsequently liable for filing statement in Form 27EQ within the prescribed time. On verification of the records, the AO observed that the assessee has not collected TCS to the tune of Rs. 2,45,595/- on sale of scrap of Rs. 2,45,59,583/- for financial year 2012-13 relevant to assessment year 2013- 14. The assessee had also not filed statement in Form 27EQ for the assessment year under consideration. The assessee was called to furnish documentary evidence, h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Sec 206C(3) person has to prepare and submit a statement in Form 27EQ to the prescribed income tax authority within the time prescribed in Rule 31AA of the Income Tax Rules 1962. On verification of the records it is seen that assessee has not collected TCS to the tune of Rs 2,45,595/- on sale of scrap of Rs 2,45,59,583/- for the FY 2012-13 relevant to AY 2013-14. Assessee has also not filed statement in form 27EQ for the year under consideration. Assessee also did not furnish form 27C which is a pre requisite in case tax is not collected by the seller from the buyer. The appellant could produce the form 27C only subsequently at appellate stage that is very late. 4.2 Thus, the assessee appellant has not complied with the requirement of the sec 206C. Firstly, it had not collected the tax and secondly in case tax was not deductible. It had not obtained form 27C as per requirements of that section. Thus, apparently there is non-compliance that led to the framing of order u/s 206C by the AO vide order dtd. 20.12.2017. The appellant is aggrieved and has stated that the AO did not give sufficient opportunity of being heard and even did not issue any effective show cause notice.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that it is a mere procedural lapse if form 27C is not filed in time. Though some High Court have held that no time lines are contained in section 206C, the department has not accepted those decisions. Revenue has moved the Hon'ble Supreme court on this aspect and the SLP of the department has been admitted before the Supreme Court in CIT(TDS) Vs Siyaram Metal Udyog Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 78 Taxman.com 157(SC). It needs to mentioned here that the case of Adishankara spinning mills was actually decided the issue whether cotton waste would constitute scrap or not. The question of form 27C late filing was not specifically entertained. A decision can be a precedent on the issue that it decides. In any case those high court decisions would not apply in the case of the appellant because there is an inordinate delay in filing the form whereas in the decision cited the delays were minor." 7. The assessee is in appeal before us against the aforesaid order passed by Ld. CIT(Appeals). Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessment order was passed in a very hurried manner and even during appellate proceedings, Ld. CIT(Appeals) has not taken cognizance of the relevant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is no dispute about the fact that the assessee has belatedly submitted relevant Form No. 27C collected from its buyers. The same were placed on record before the Assessing Officer itself who declined to accept the same in view of delay in submission thereof. There is no issue qua genuineness of these Forms. The co-ordinate Bench decision of Tribunal in case of Bharti Metals already holds that such a belated submission of relevant Form is a procedural lapse only. The Revenue is unable to point any distinction on facts or law therein. Thus, addition with the aid of section 206C could not be made. The High Court held as under:- "In terms of the explanation clause (aa) any person who purchases the goods in retail sale for personal consumption would not be included within the definition of term 'buyer'. It is therefore, that under sub-section (1A) of section 206C, calculation of tax under sub-section (1) would not be made, if the buyer furnishes to the person responsible for the tax a declaration in writing in prescribed form declaring that the goods in question are to be utilized for the purposes of manufacturing process or producing articles or things or for the purpo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....prise v. ITO 49 taxmann.com 509 (Ahmedabad - Trib.), the ITAT held that Assessee company could not be treated as assessee in default for not collecting TCS from its buyers from whom assessee had received declaration as per section 206C(1A). Further, ITAT held that where buyers had paid tax on their income and such income had been assessed after taking into consideration purchases made from assessee, tax could not be again collected from assessee on non-collection or short-collection of TCS. The relevant para of the judgment are reproduced as under:- '15. We find that section 206C (1A) reads as under:- "Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), no collection of tax shall be made in the case of a buyer, who is ITA No. 2384/A/2012 K.P.G. Enterprise, Bhavnagar AY 2010- 11 resident in India, if such buyer furnishes to the person responsible for collecting tax, a declaration in writing in duplicate in the prescribed form and verified in the prescribed manner to the effect that the goods referred to in column (2) of the aforesaid Table are to be utilized for the purposes of manufacturing, processing or producing articles or things [or for the purposes of....