Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 962 - AT - Income TaxInterest u/s. 201(1A) - assessee has not remitted the TDS in to the account of Central Government within the time - assessee has not filed Form No. 26A as per provisions to Section 201(1) so that Assessing Officer could have determined whether the assessee is in default or not - HELD THAT:- No doubt assessee has not filed the Form 26A but now assessee has brought evidence before the Assessing Officer to substantiate that the payee NECL has filed the return of income and paid the due tax. We cannot forget that assessee is collecting the above tax on behalf of Government and the duty on the assessee is statutorily obligated upon. When assessee fails to comply with the provisions, the liability is on the assessee until the due tax is collected or paid to Government. In this case, no doubt assessee has not complied with the provisions but Government has collected the due tax from the payee on the date of filing the return of income and payee paid the due tax before filing the return of income. Therefore, following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages Ltd [2007 (8) TMI 12 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] the department is allowed to claim interest on failure is upto the date of filing the return of income. Therefore, we direct the Assessing Officer to calculate the interest u/s. 201(1A) from the date of payment to the date of filing of the return of income by the payee. Therefore, ground of appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Interest u/s. 234B charagibility - double taxation by way of interest, once u/s. 201(1A) from the payer-assessee and again u/s. 234C from Navayuga Engineering Company Limited (NECL) - HELD THAT:- Assessee has submitted that the payee has filed return of income and paid the due tax including interest u/s. 234B, Assessing Officer cannot calculate interest u/s. 201(1A). In our view, assessee failed to understand the mandate of the two Sections i.e., Sec. 201(1) is the obligation on the collector of tax and Sec. 234B is the obligation on the tax payer itself, who has to pay the due tax on time. There is significant difference in statutory obligations posted on the collector of tax and statutory obligation on the tax payer. Therefore, these two obligations and the mandate of two sections are different and cannot be equated. Accordingly, grounds raised by assessee are dismissed. Demand raised u/s.201(1) & 201(1A) - mis-match of figures and information in Balance Sheet of assessee and NECL - HELD THAT:- On careful verification of bank statement of NUTPL submitted before us, we notice that NUTPL received ₹ 54.25 Crores on 25-06-2010 but on the next day, the same funds were transferred to NECL. What is the necessity to transfer on the next day, what is the purpose, is it paid on behalf of assessee or whether they have their own contract. The balance sheet of NECL and NUTPL were not filed before us to verify the figures. Since there are discrepancies noted in the entries and bank transactions, we deem it fit and proper to remit this issue back to the file of Assessing Officer to verify this transaction exclusively from the letter issued to ICICI and payment to NUTPL and subsequently, same payment of ₹ 44.25 Crores and ₹ 10 Crores were made from NUTPL to NECL on the next day. Accordingly, grounds raised by Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.
|