TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (9) TMI 1623
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not liable to deduct TDS under its TAN as they have centralized system of deducting TDS, and Learned CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the order of Learned AO merely due to the reason that quarterly TDS Statement w/s 200(3) did not contain the details or TDS Statement u/s 200(3) was not filed for which penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) is leviable but assessee cannot be treated as "assessee in default" u/s 201 for such failure as the assessee had duly deducted and deposited the TDS, hence, it is prayed that the demand raised may kindly be cancelled. 2. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned ITO (TDS), Bhilai has erred on facts and in law in computing the amount payable u/s 201(1) @ 20% of Rs. 98,360/- i.e. Rs. 19,672/-(which already stands deposited by the assessee, credit whereof has not been given) which is applicable in the case where no PAN is available as per Section 206AA instead of computing the amount @ 1% as per Section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Learned CIT (Appeals)-11, Raipur has erred in confirming the action of the Learned AO as the PAN was submitted at later date. Hence, it is prayed that the amoun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o M/s Maa Shitla Radio @20% of Rs. 1,22,229/- i.e. Rs. 24,446/- (Rs. 1,657/- already stands deposited by the assessee, credit whereof has not been given) which is applicable in the case where no PAN is available as per Section 206AA instead of computing the amount @ 1% as per Section 194C of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Learned CIT (Appeals)-11, Raipur has erred in confirming the action of the Learned AO as the PAN was submitted at later date. Hence, it is prayed that the amount payable as per Section 201(1) be computed @ 1% as provided u/s 194C as PAN of the said deductee is available, the Learned AO has further erred in not giving credit of Rs. 1,657/- which has been paid by the assessee merely due to the reason that the same could not be mentioned in the quarterly TDS Statement u/s 200(3). 3. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned ITO (TDS), Bhilai has erred on facts and in law in computing the amount payable u/s 201(1) in respect of payment made to M/s Tarun Electronics for purchase of electrical goods amounting to Rs. 1,54,877/-, as liability to deduct TDS does not arise on purchase of goods. Thus, the Learned A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Thus the Learned AO has erred in computing TDS of Rs. 2,118/- and the Learned CIT(A) is not justified in passing non speaking order as the order of Learned CIT(A) is silent on the said issue. 3. Without prejudice to the above, alternatively, the Learned AO has erred in computing TDS of Rs. 2,118/- without appreciating the fact that the payee has duly furnished his return of income us 139 and as per first proviso to 201(1), if a person fails to deduct whole or part of TDS on the sum paid to payee, the person shall not be deemed to be assessee in default, if the payee has furnished his return of income u/s 139. 4. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Learned ITO (TDS), Bhilai has erred on facts and in law in computing the amount payable us 201(1) in respect of payment made to Mr. Kamdev Sinha for purchase of Building Material amounting to Rs. 1,00,000/-, as there was no liability to deduct TDS on purchase of goods. Thus, the Learned AO has erred in computing TDS of Rs. 20,000/- (at the rate 20%) and the Learned CIT(A) is not justified in passing non speaking order as the order of Learned CIT(A) is silent on the said....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Block Resources Coordinator, Rajiv Gandhi Siksha Mission, Patan, the same assessee for 3 different assessment years having common, identical issues, therefore, we are taking up all three appeals together for adjudication. 4. At the outset, Learned AR of the assessee submitted written submissions pertaining to each year, the same are extracted as under: ITA No.33/RPR/2020 for A.Y. 2011-12 : Hon'ble Sir. Under instructions from our aforesaid client, we respectfully submit before your honor as under: 1. It is respectfully submitted that the order u/s 201&201(1A) was passed vide order dated 23.03.2018 determining the total demand payable at Rs. 98,838/- details whereof is as under: SI. N. Particulars Amount [in Rs.] a. Demand on account of tax 34,001/- b. Total interest payable 30,813/- c. Sub Total (a+b) 64,824/- d. Late Filing Fee u/s 234E of the Act 34,001/- e. Total Demand Payable as per impugned order (c+d) 98,838/- 2. The appeal filed by the assessee before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) II. Raipur was partly allowed and levy of late filing fees u/s 234E of Rs. 34,001/- was cancelled vid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s Amount [in Rs.] a. Total alleged default of tax 63,568/- b. Total interest payable 48,619/- c. Sub Total (a+b) 1,12,187/- d. Late Filing Fee u/s 234E of the Act 63,568/- e. Total Demand Payable (c+d) 1,75,755/- 2. The appeal filed by the assessee before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) II. Raipur was partly allowed and levy of late filing fees u/s 234E of Rs. 63,568/- was cancelled vide order dated 13.10.2019. 3. The assessee has preferred the appeal against the impugned order passed by FAA details whereof is as under: S. No. Ground No. Amount of alleged default of Tax Relevant page of Assessment Order Ground of Appeal Relevant page no. of Paper Book Relevant Page no. of Paper Book containing Additional Evidence Whether disclosed in TDS Return 1. 1 8,147/- Page No. -3 TDS deposited but credit not allowed Page No.-6 (Challan) Page 2 & 11- Revised TDS Return * Page 23 to 25- Affidavit (Breakup of Rs. 16,949/-is on page no. 23 to 25) No, challan is unclaimed 2. 2 24,446/- Page No.-2&3 * TDS computed @ 20% U/s 206AA which is not applicable. *TDS of R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2019. 3. The assessee has preferred the appeal against the impugned order passed by FAA details where of is as under: S. No. Ground No. Amount of alleged default of Tax Relevant page of Assessment Order Ground of Appeal Relevant page no. of Paper Book Relevant Page no. of Paper Book containing Additional Evidence Whether disclosed in TDS Return 1. 1 11,977/- Page No. -4 TDS deposited mentioning PAN of payee. Page No.-4 (Challan) * Page 4 & 6- Revised TDS Return Affidavit (Breakup of Rs. 12,628/-is on page no. 4 to 6) No, TDS deposited mentioning PAN of payee 2. 2 & 3 2,118/- Page No.-4 * Payment against purchase of Builder Material. TDS does not arise on purchase. Payee has furnished his ROI u/s 139 and as per first proviso to Section 201(1) Page No.-5 to 7 (Copy of Form- 26A of Shri Jay Kumar Tamrakar) * Page No.-1 to 3 (Copy of Form- 26A of Shri Jay Kumar Tamrakar) NA 3. 3 20,000/- Page No. -4 * TDS computed @ 20% U/s 206AA which is not applicable. * Payment against purchase of Electric Builder Material, TDS does not arise on purchase. Page No.- 8 (Bill of purchase of builder Materi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as 'assessee in default' u/s 201 for such failure as the assessee has duly deducted and deposited the TDS, hence, it is prayed that the demand raised may kindly be cancelled. 6. The second issue raised by the assessee was pertaining to deduction of TDS @1% u/s 194C of the Act whereas the same should be @20% when the PAN number of the contractor are not available. It was the contention of the Learned AR that since the assessee has submitted the PAN on a later date, the finding of Learned CIT(A)-II, Raipur was erroneous in confirming the action of Learned AO for making such additions. 7. The third issue raised by the Learned AR was pertaining to treating the 'assessee in default' in respect certain amount without appreciating that the said deductee/payee had discharged the income tax liability due therein and filed the return of income without considering the provisions of Section 4, 191, 202 and 205 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The aforesaid 3 contentions were raised by the assessee in its ITA No. 33/RPR/2020 for A.Y. 2011-12, apart from aforesaid common contentions, the assessee has assailed more grounds of appeal pertaining to TDS in ITA Nos.34 & 35/RPR/2020. 7. Fur....