DIRECTOR OF PHYSICAL PLANT O.U.A.T,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT(CPC-TDS), GHAZIABAD

आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक न्यायपीठ,कटक IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CUTTACK BENCH CUTTACK BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपीऱ सं./ITA Nos.05 to 11/CTK/2020 (AY:2010-2011)(4th Quarter) 26Q (AY:2011-2012)(4th Quarter) 26Q (AY:2012-2013)(4th Quarter) 26Q (AY:2013-2014)(4th Quarter) 26Q (AY:2014-2015) (2nd Quarter)26Q (AY:2014-2015)(3rd Quarter) 26Q (AY:2017-2018) (4th Quarter)26Q Director of Physical Plant, OUAT Vs. ACIT(CPC-TDS), Ghaziabad Siripur, Bhubaneswar District : Khurda TAN No. : BBND 00486 D (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : None िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR सुनवाई की तािीख / Date of Hearing : 14/10/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date of Pronouncement : 16/10/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: The assessee has filed these seven appeals against the order of CIT(A)-1, Bhubaneswar, dated 22.10.2019 & 16.10.2019 for the A.Ys. 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015 & 2017- 2018, respectively 2. None appeared on behalf of the assessee even the case was called for second round of hearing. Applications dated 14.10.2020 have been

2 ITA Nos.05-11/CTK/2020

filed by the ld.AR of the assessee for adjournment, however, looking to

the facts and circumstances of the case, we rejected the adjournment

applications and proceeded to dispose off all the appeals of the

assessee after considering the submissions of ld.DR and the material

evidence available on record.

confirming the interest u/s.201(1A) of the Act along with interest

charged u/s.220(2) of the Act by the CIT(A) and also levy of late filing

fee u/s.234E of the Act in the appeals for A.Y. 2014-2015 for Quarters

2nd & 3rd. The details of fee levied in all the appeals are as under :-

ITA Nos. A.Y. Qtr Interest Late filing Interest Total fee Demand levied fee levied levied levied confirmed u/s.201(1A) u/s.234E u/s.220(2) by the of the Act of the Act of the Act CIT(A) 05/CTK/20 2010-11 4 12,888/- - 4,608/- 17,500/- 1,34,541/- 06/CTK/20 2011-12 4 1,19,071/- - 15,470/- 1,34,541/- 1,34,541/- 07/CTK/20 2012-13 4 14,527/- - 3,190/- 17,720/- 17,720/- 08/CTK/20 2013-14 4 7,311/- - 3,334/- 10,650/- 10,650/- 09/CTK/20 2014-15 2 - 12,800/- 5,984/- 18,780/- 18,780/- 10/CTK/20 2014-15 3 - 17,200/- 8,084/- 25,284/- 25,284/- 11/CTK/20 2017-18 4 2,799/- - - 2,800/- 2,800/-

figure, therefore, all the appeals are heard analogously and disposed off

by this consolidated order. For the sake of convenience, we shall take

into consideration the facts and grounds mentioned in ITA

No.05/CTK/2020 for the assessment year 2011-2012 for deciding all

the appeals and the outcome of the same shall be applied mutatis

mutandis to the other appeals also.

3 ITA Nos.05-11/CTK/2020 5. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Government of

Odisha Organisation and remitted TDS amount for the respective

quarters in the respective assessment years under consideration

belatedly, on the basis of which the ACIT (TDS-CPC), Ghaziabad issued

an intimation u/s.154 of the Act levying interest on late payment

u/s.201(1) and 220(2) of the Act. Further, the ACIT(TDS-CPC) has also

levied late fee u/s.234E of the Act for Quarter-2nd & 3rd (AY: 2014-

2015). Aggrieved thereby, the assessee preferred appeal before the

CIT(A) and the CIT(A) upheld the action of ACIT(TDS-CPC) and

dismissed the appeals of the assessee.

material available on record and orders of authorities below, we find

that the assessee is a Government of Odisha Organisation and due to

delay in remittance of the TDS amount for the above quarters in the

respective assessment years under consideration, the ACIT(TDS-CPC),

Ghaziabad has levied late filing fee u/s.201(1A)/220(2) of the Act in

the all appeals under consideration and the AO also levied late filing fee

u/s.234E of the Act for the A.Y.2014-2015(Quarter-2nd &3rd), to which

the CIT(A) in appeal has upheld the action of ACIT(TDS-CPC).

4 ITA Nos.05-11/CTK/2020 9. First of all, with regard to levy of late filing of TDS u/s.234E of the

Act for the A.Y.2014-2015(Quarter-2nd &3rd), we are of the opinion that

this issue is covered by the decision of coordinate bench of the Tribunal

in the case of D.D.Motors Vs. DCIT(CPC-TDS) [2019] 111 taxmann.com

493 (Delhi-Trib) and the decision in the case of Govt. High School, Unit-

6 Vs. ACIT(CPC-TDS), in ITA Nos.401-404/CTK/2019, order dated

25.02.2020, wherein it is held that prior to amendment of section 200A

of the Act with effect from 1-6-2015, levy of late fee under section 234E

for default in furnishing TDS statement could not be effected in course

of intimation while processing TDS statement under section 200A of

the Act. Therefore, the fee levied u/s.234E of the Act while processing

the statement of tax deducted at source was beyond the scope provided

under Section 200A of the Act. Accordingly, we respectfully follow the

above decisions of the Tribunal and set aside the orders of lower

authorities in this regard and delete the levy of late filing fee u/s.234E

of the Act for the A.Y.2014-2015(Quarter-2nd &3rd).

on perusal of the order of CIT(A), we find that the assessee has

explained for late filing of TDS, however, there is no deliberation on the

submissions made by the assessee in this regard by the CIT(A) and the

CIT(A) has only endorsed to the action taken by the ACIT(TDS-CPC).

Looking to the facts of the case, we remit the issue involved in all the

5 ITA Nos.05-11/CTK/2020 appeals under consideration to the file of CIT(A) to pass a reasoned and

speaking order after verification of the TDS payments as submitted by

the assessee before him. The assessee is directed to appear before the

CIT(A) along with the documents regarding payments made to the

contractor with complete details i.e. amount of payment, date of

payment, date of TDS deduction and date of TDS deposit along with

copy of challan. The CIT(A) is also directed to consider the documents

filed by the assessee and decide the issue as per law. Needless to say,

the assessee shall be given reasonable opportunity of hearing and the

assessee is also directed to cooperate with the CIT(A) for early disposal

of the case. Further, on perusal of the order of the CIT(A) for A.Y.2010-

2011 and the intimation u/s.154 of the Act, it is found that the CIT(A)

has wrongly sustained Rs.1,34,541/- instead of Rs.17,500/-. As per the

demand raised by the ACIT(TDS-CPC), Ghaziabad vide intimation

u/s.154 of the Act, the interest on late payment u/s.201(1A) and

interest charged u/s.220(2) of the Act is Rs.17,500/-. Therefore, the

CIT(A) is directed to modify his order dated 22.10.2019 passed in

I.T.Appeal No.0237/2018-19 for assessment year 2010-2011

accordingly. And, after rectification, the CIT(A) is directed to pass order

in the terms of our above observations made for all the assessment

years under consideration. We order accordingly.

6 ITA Nos.05-11/CTK/2020 11. In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No.05 to

08/CTK/2020 & ITA No.11/CTK/2020 are allowed for the statistical

purposes and appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos.09&10/CTK/2020 are

partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 16/10/ 2020. Sd/- Sd/- (C.M.GARG) (L.P.SAHU) न्याययक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 16/10/2020 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S. आदेश की प्रयिलऱपप अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीलाथी / The Appellant- 1. Director of Physical Plant, OUAT Siripur, Bhubaneswar District : Khurda प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 2. ACIT(CPC-TDS), Ghaziabad आयकि आयुक्त(अऩील) / The CIT(A), 3. आयकि आयुक्त / CIT 4. ववभागीय प्रनतननधध, आयकि अऩीलीय अधधकिण, कटक / DR, ITAT, 5. Cuttack गार्ा पाईल / Guard file. 6. सत्यावऩत प्रनत //True Copy// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

(Senior Private Secretary) आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, कटक/ITAT, Cuttack