TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 858X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the Revenue assailing the orders of the ld. CIT(A) raising common grounds, which are as under:- 1. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in holding that section 194 in not applicable in case of provisioning of amounts to interest on FDRs/time deposits on the basis of Board's circular No.03/2010 dated 02/03/2010 ignoring the fact that the circular is applicable only in the case of Core Banking Solutions whereas the case of the assessee in the relevant assessment year was of Non Core Banking Solutions. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in holding that section 194 is not applicable in case of provisioning of amounts to interest on FDRs/time deposits on the basis of Hon'ble Income Tax Applicable Tribun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt years, during the course of survey conducted under section 133A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called in short the Act ), it was noticed that the assessee is a banking company and is engaged in banking business and the bank has paid/credited interest to its customers, but failed to deduct tax at source on the payment of interest. The Assessing Officer accordingly held the assessee to be in default for non-deduction of TDS and made additions accordingly, against which the assessees preferred appeals and in ITA Nos. 476, 477, 479, 480 and 481/LKW/2012, the ld. CIT(A) has allowed relief to the assessee following the Board s Circular No.3/2010 dated 2.3.2010 and the order of the Ahmedabad Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at in the relevant provisions of the Act no time limit is prescribed for initiating the proceedings under sections 201(1), 201(1A) and 206C(7) of the Act, therefore, the orders passed by the Assessing Officer cannot be called to be time barred. Moreover, these orders were passed when the Assessing Officer has noted, during the course of survey, that on all the payments of interest TDS were not deducted by the assessee. The ld. D.R. placed reliance upon the decisions of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT(TDS) vs. H.M.T. Ltd. 340 ITR 219 (P H) and Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Bhura Exports Ltd. vs. ITO (TDS) [2012] 202 Taxman 88, in which it has been held that there is no time limit for passing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 011 9. A bare perusal of the dates of the assessment orders demonstrates that they have been passed much beyond the period of 10 years. The Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd. vs. DCIT [2009] 313 ITR (AT) 263 (Mumbai) [SB] held that no order under section 201(1) or 201(1A) of the Act can be passed where the Revenue has not taken any action against the payee and further the time limit for taking action against the payee under section 147 has also expired. 10. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. NHK Japan Broadcasting Corporation [2008] 305 ITR 137 (Delhi) held that the date of knowledge was not relevant for the purposes of exercising jurisdiction in so far as th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 and noticed that in these judgments it has been held that the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act could not be annulled on the ground of delay and latches. 2. We find that two divergent views have been expressed by the different High Courts on the impugned issue. In the light of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Vegetable Products, 88 ITR 192 (SC), the judgment which is in favour of the assessee should be accepted. We, therefore, have no option but to follow the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal which are in favour of the assessee. Accordingly we hold that the impugned orders under section 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
