TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 1029X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided in favour of assessee. The facts and findings recorded therein, has substance over the order passed by the ITO(TDS) u/s 201(1) 201(1A) of the Act. Considering the observations of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case as quoted supra, we allow the grounds raised by the assessee on this issue. - ITA Nos. 8, 9, 10 & 11/H/2020 - - - Dated:- 29-11-2021 - Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial Member And Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Sanjeev Aditya For the Revenue : Shri Rohit Mujumdar ORDER PER BENCH: These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against CIT(A), Tirupati s orders, all dated 05/11/2019 for AYs 2011-12 to 2014-15 involving proceedings u/s 201(1) 201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ; in short the Act . As facts and grounds are identical in these appeals, they were clubbed and heard together and, therefore, a common order is passed for the sake of convenience. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are common in all these appeals, which are as under: 1. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is erroneous, against the provisions of law and contrary to the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant and found that they are not relevant to the issue on hand. Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Karawat Steel Traders held that disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) is not warranted, where the person responsible to deduct TDS received declarations in Form Nos.15G/15H for non-filing or delayed filing of such forms before Commissioner of Income Tax. In the present case, it is not non-filing or delayed filing of forms before the CIT which prompted the AO to raising demand. It is for the fault of the appellant of not obtaining the fohns in proper form the AO levied tax hence, this ratio is not applicable. Similarly, the appellant also relied on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Vipin P.Mehta, which is also not relevant to the facts of the case. The appellant argued that once Form Nos.15G/15H are obtained there is no obligation on the part of the appellant to make TDS irrespective of the fact whether the forms are properly filled or not. In this connection, as discussed above, Sec.197A of the Act clearly speaks that the forms must be duly filled in and duly verified by the depositor. The person making payment should obtain the forms in the prescribed for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le deciding whether the assessee is an assessee deemed to be in default or not and there are provisions for various set of default, that does not preclude the AO to examine the details while concluding any proceedings. 10. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record as well as gone through the orders of revenue authorities. During the course of survey operation, Form No. 15G and 15H maintained in Bank were verified by the AO an found that they did not contain any of the details, such as name of the depositor, amount of fixed deposit, date of said deposit made, date of maturity, interest rate etc. When the above discrepancies were confronted with the Chief Manager of the Bank, he failed to give a convincing reply, hence, the AO treated the assessee as an assessee in default for non-deduction of tax u/s 201 of the IT Act and accordingly, raised demand u/s 201(1) and interest u/s 201(1A). While confirming the order of the AO, the categorical findings of the CIT(A) are that The purpose of obtaining forms in the prescribed mode will be lost, if the declarants allowed to file the forms without fulfilling all the columns as applicable. Filing of decla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regating to ₹ 5,06,87,398/-. The break-up of the interest paid by the assessee and the disallowance effected by the Assessing Officer is as follows: Particulars AY 2010-2011 Interest paid on deposits disallowed by the Assessing Officer (ACIT, Tirupathi) 6,73,55,000 Of which Amount No. of accounts Interest paid in excess of ₹ 10.00 lakhs 16,17,431 1 Above ₹ 2.00 lakhs up to 10.00 lakhs 78,65,551 12 Above ₹ 1.00 lakh up to 2.00 lakhs 28,52,120 23 Above ₹ 50,000/- up to ₹ 1.00 lakh 55,62,007 83 Above ₹ 20,000 up to ₹ 50,000/- 1,99,38,285 702 Above ₹ 10,000/- up to ₹ 20, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2800 in number from various branches after a period of two years, that is, at the time of finalization of assessment would be too strenuous on the part of the assessee to comply with. Considering the fact that it is possible that old forms have been lost due to various reasons, assessee prays that there are reasonable causes why assessee could not furnish each and every form 15G and 15H obtained. 8.5 It is submitted that the assessee collects Form 15G and 15H in respect of all deposit holders having an interest of ₹ 10,000/- or more, and the failure to furnish copies of Form 15G/15H before the Assessing Authority be considered in the background of the difficulties faced by assessee. Further it is submitted that as the assessee had collected Form 15G/15H, the provisions of Section40(a)(ia) has no application as was held by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Kumar Enterprises in ITA No.1750/Hyd/2013 following the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Valibhai Khanbhai Mankad. 9. The Learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, relied on the order of CIT(A). 10. We have considered the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e are of the view that the assessee has complied with the provisions of section 197A. Assessee also submitted that it has placed a system of collecting the forms from rural branches to HO and submitting the same at the time of assessment. Assessee also submitted that in the subsequent assessments, it was properly submitted the forms to Assessing Officer. Considering the above submissions, in our view, assessee is not at default and also as held in the case of Kumar Enterprises (supra) and Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Valibhai Khanbhai Mankad, that once the assessee obtained Form 15I from the sub-contractors whose contents are not disputed or whose genuineness is not doubted, then, the assessee is not liable to deduct tax from the payment made to sub-contractor. Once, assessee is not liable to deduct tax u/s 194C then disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) cannot be made. The assessee s breach of the requirement to furnish details to the income tax authority in the prescribed form within the prescribed time may attract other consequences but cannot result in a section 40(a)(ia) disallowances. Hence, addition made on this count is deleted. 10.1 In the above decision, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
