Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN
Before: Shri Chandra Poojari, AM & Shri George George K, JM
Per George George K, JM :
These appeals at the instance of the assessee are directed against the consolidated order of the CIT(A) dated 27.11.2017. The relevant assessment years are 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2011-1012. The order of the CIT(A) arises out of the order passed by the Asst.Commissioner of Income-tax (TDS) u/s 201(1), 201(1A) and 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Common issue is raised in these appeals, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order.
ITA Nos.23-28/Coch/2018. 2 M/s.Qatar Airways. 2. The grounds raised in these appeals are identical except for variance in figures, hence, ground relating to ITA No.23/Coch/2018 (Asst.Year 2008-2009 4th Quarter) is reproduced below:-
The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the demand raised by the TDS officer in the order passed u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) & u/s 154 towards short deduction of TDS amounting to Rs.22,500/- and consequential interest amounting to Rs. 8,885/- totaling to Rs. 31,385/- for assessment year 2008-09 quarter 4. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the said demand had arisen purely on account of data entry error of not mentioning lower rate reference of TDS as prescribed under section 197 of the Income Tax Act. The said error was corrected by filing necessary correction returns and thereby the said demand was fully cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above- mentioned quarter. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not taking into consideration the submissions along with documentary evidences produced by appellant during the time of hearing vide letter dated 27 July, 2015, which clearly reflected that the entire demand has been cancelled and there was no default reflected at TRACES website for the above-mentioned quarter. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in stating that the appellant produced no documentary evidence during the course of hearing confirming that the demand has been deleted.
Your appellant craves leave to add to, alter or delete any of the above grounds, if and when necessary.”
ITA Nos.23-28/Coch/2018. 3 M/s.Qatar Airways.
Brief facts of the case are as follows: There was short deduction of tax and remittance of the same to the Government account by the assessee for various quarters of assessment years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2011-2012. For the short deduction of tax and remittance of the same, the assessee was made liable for tax and interest u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T.Act. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer passed order u/s 154 of the I.T.Act reducing the liability. The details of the final liability quantified u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T.Act for various quarters for assessment years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 are as follows:
Sl. Asst. Year Quarter Demand as per assessment order No. 201(1) 201(1A) Total 1 2008-2009 Q4 22,500 8,885 31,385 2 2009-2010 Q1 1,97,960 74,912 2,72,872 3 2009-2010 Q2 5,80,360 1,74,370 7,54,730 4 2009-2010 Q3 1,14,690 40,876 1,55,566 5 2009-2010 Q4 11,970 3,650 15,620 6 2011-2012 Q1 1,86,700 88,530 2,75,230
Aggrieved by the demand raised u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the I.T.Act, the assessee filed appeals before the first appellate authority. The CIT(A) confirmed the view taken by the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeals of the assessee.
Aggrieved by the order passed by the CIT(A), the assessee has filed these appeals before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a paper book in each of the cases enclosing the summarized statement showing demand as per assessment order giving quarter-wise details and current demand status as per the Traces portal and also copies of documents submitted
ITA Nos.23-28/Coch/2018. 4 M/s.Qatar Airways. to the CIT(A). The assessee has also filed a brief argument note. The content of the same is that the demand has purely arising due to error in entering the particulars of lower deduction certificate in the TDS return and the TDS returns were subsequently revised by incorporating the details of lower TDS certificate upon which the demand has got reduced to `nil’. The learned Departmental Representative present was duly heard.
We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The contention of the assessee is that it had rectified all the defects in the TDS return and has made the demand in Traces at `nil’. Copies of the `nil’ demand status report generated from the Traces are enclosed in the paper book filed by the assessee. The assessee had also produced the particulars of lower deduction certificate in the paper book filed by the assessee. On perusal of the status report generated from Traces furnished in the paper book filed by the assessee, the demand pertaining to each of the quarters for assessment years 2008-2009, 2009-2010 and 2011-2012 is `nil’. Since the assessee has produced the necessary particulars of lower deduction tax certificate and has claimed to have correct TDS return by revising the same, in the interest of justice and equity, we are of the view that the matter needs to be examined afresh by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall examine the details now furnished before us and take a decision in accordance with law after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. It is ordered accordingly.
ITA Nos.23-28/Coch/2018. 5 M/s.Qatar Airways.
In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on this 01st day of August, 2019.
Sd/- Sd/- (Chandra Poojari) (George George K.) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Cochin ; Dated : 01st August, 2019. Devdas*
Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT (Appeals) Thiruvananthapuram. 4. The Pr.CIT Thiruvananthapuram. 5. DR, ITAT, Cochin 6. Guard file.
BY ORDER,
(Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Cochin