TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (4) TMI 286
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....use of the absence of original TDS certificates. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of law, the appellant submits that the AO be directed to cancel the order under s. 154." 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed its return of income on 18th Nov., 1997 claiming credit for the TDS amounting to Rs. 45,38,865. The assessee has filed a photocopy of the acknowledgement sheet before us, which shows that the assessee had, inter alia, filed 10 certificates of TDS along with the return of income. However, the AO did not allow credit for three TDS certificates aggregating to Rs. 11,28,430 while issuing the intimation under s. 143(1)(a) of the IT Act on 3rd Feb., 1998. It is st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the AO withdrawing interest under s. 244A the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) without success in this behalf. The assessee is now in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. In support of the appeal, the learned Authorized Representative for the assessee has made three-fold submissions. His first submission is that the originals of TDS certificates were filed along with the return of income together with seven other TDS certificates and, hence, the loss of TDS certificates in the IT office cannot be attributed to the assessee. His second submission is that no opportunity of hearing was given to the assessee by the AO in terms of the requirements under s. 154(3) of the IT Act before carrying out the i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no delay which could be attributed to the assessee in furnishing the indemnity bond. 5. In reply, the learned Departmental Representative supported the orders passed by the AO and the learned CIT(A). On being asked by the Bench to clarify as to whether the AO has referred the matter to the Chief CIT regarding computation of period of delay in terms of sub-s. (2) of s. 244A, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that the orders passed by the Departmental authorities did not indicate that the matter was referred to the Chief CIT or CIT regarding the exclusion of the period of delay in terms of s. 244A(2). 6. We have heard the parties. In our view, the assessee is entitled to succeed. Sub-s. (2) of s. 244A requires that where a q....