9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the 2nd and 4th quarter of the assessment year 2013-14. The grounds raised in both the appeals are identical except the figures. 2. At the outset, Shri Nitesh Joshi, learned Counsel for the assessee expressed his intention not to press ground no.1 in both the appeals. Accordingly, ground no.1 in both the appeals are dismissed. 3. In ground no.2, the assessee has challenged the demand raised under section 201(1) of the Act on account of short deduction of tax at source and the interest levied on such amount under section 201(1A) of the Act. 4. Brief facts are, during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under dispute, the assessee was supposed to make payments to three parties viz. Tata Teleservices Maharashtra Ltd., Jahang ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cer concerned has specified the amount which is subject to deduction of tax at lower rate. However, the assessee had continued to deduct tax at lower rate in respect of payment over and above the amount stipulated in the certificates issued under section 197(2) of the Act. Thus, learned Commissioner (Appeals) held that default on the part of the assessee in adhering to the amount specified in the certificates issued under section 197(2) of the Act for the purpose of deduction of tax at lower rate would make the assessee a assessee in default for short deduction of tax and would also make it liable for levy of interest under section 201(1A) of the Act. However, considering assessee's alternative submission that the payees have offered the am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ities Ltd. v/s ITO, [2017] 78 taxmann.com 152 (Kol.). 7. The learned Departmental Representative strongly relied upon the observations of learned Commissioner (Appeals). 8. We have heard considered rival submissions and perused material on record. We have also carefully examined the decision relied upon by the learned Counsel for the assessee. Insofar as the factual aspect of the issue is concerned, there is no dispute that in terms with section 197(2) of the Act r/w rule 28AA, the Assessing Officer had issued certificates in respect of three parties permitting deduction of tax at source at lower rate. It is a fact on record, in these certificates issued in Form no.13, the Assessing Officer has specified the payment which is subject to de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mstances, if the assessee continues to deduct tax at the rate specified in the certificate, even, in respect of payment made over and above the sum specified in the certificate, it cannot be treated as assessee in default for short deduction of tax. In our view, the aforesaid decision of the Co-ordinate Bench squarely applies to the facts of the present case. In the absence of any contrary decision having been brought to our notice by learned Departmental Representative, we are inclined to follow the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench referred to above and hold that the assessee cannot be treated as assessee in default for short deduction of tax. Accordingly, we reverse the impugned orders of learned Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue in b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
