Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
Before: S/SHRI N.S SAINI & PAVAN KUMAR GADALE
1 ITA No .130/ CTK/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK
BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.130/CTK/2017 Assessment Year : 2009-2010
Cuttack Muncipal Vs. ACIT(TDS-II), Corporation, Choudhury Bhubaneswar. Bazar, Cuttack PAN/GIR No.BBNCO 0195 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)
Assessee by : Shri T.K.Agarwalla, aR Revenue by : Shri A. Tigga, DR
Date of Hearing : 26/04/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 26/04/ 2018
O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the
CIT(A), Cuttack dated 18.3.2016 for the assessment year 2009-2010.
The appeal filed by the assessee society is barred by limitation by
303 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition dated 8.3.2018
supported by affidavit for condoning the delay in filing the appeal. After
going through the condonation petition, we find that the assessee had
reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within the stipulated time. Ld
D.R. did not have any objection for condoning the delay. We, therefore,
condone the delay of 303 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and
admit the appeal for hearing.
2 ITA No .130/ CTK/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0
The sole issue involved in this appeal is that the CIT(A) erred in
confirming the demand of Rs.13,64,474/- raised u/s.201(1)/201(1A) of
the Income Tax act, 1961.
The facts in brief are that the Assessing Officer found that the
assessee deductor had failed to deduct tax at source at the time of
making payment to the various persons/concerns. The Assessing Officer
required the assessee to explain as to why it shall not be treated as an
assessee in default in terms of provisions of section 201(1) of the I.T.Act.
After considering the submission of the assessee, the Assessing Officer
has imposed Rs.13,64,474/- for non-deduction of tax u/s.201(1)/201(1A)
of the Act.
Before the CIT(A), the assessee did not file appeal within the
stipulated period. It was submitted by the assessee that the assessee is
an urban local body and functionary of the State Government and for
every stage of proceedings, it has to obtain approval and clearance
process of which is a cumbersome affair and takes much time and,
therefore, there was delay in filing the appeal. The above explanation of
the assessee did not find favour by the CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal
of the assessee on the ground of delay in filing the appeal.
Before us, ld A.R. submitted that sufficient opportunities have not
been allowed to the assessee to furnish the details as regards non-
deduction of tax. The contention of ld A.R. of the assessee is that the
3 ITA No .130/ CTK/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0
matter may be restored back to the file of the Assessing officer with the
direction to verify the records and to ascertain whether any deduction is
at all required under the respective provisions of Income tax Act.
On the other hand, ld D.R. supported the orders of lower
authorities.
We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of lower
authorities and materials available on record. In the instant case, the
Assessing Officer has imposed Rs.13,64,474/- for non-deduction of tax
u/s.201(1/201(1A) of the Act from the payments made to various parties.
As the assessee did not file appeal within the stipulated period, the
CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal and did not
adjudicate the appeal on merits.
It was the contention of ld A.R. of the assessee that the assessee is
an urban local body and functionary of the State Government and for
every stage of proceedings, it had to obtain approval of the State
Government. As there was delay in obtaining approval of Government by
the assessee, the assessee filed the appeal beyond the prescribe period.
We find force in the submission of the ld A.R. of the assessee and in order
to render substantial justice, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) and
direct to condone the delay and adjudicate the issue on merits after
allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
4 ITA No .130/ CTK/ 2017 Asse ssment Year : 20 09- 201 0
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical
purposes.
Order pronounced on 26 /04/2018. Sd/- sd/- (Pavan Kumar Gadale) (N.S Saini) JUDICIALMEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Cuttack; Dated 26 /04/2018 B.K.Parida, SPS Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. Cuttack Muncipal The Appellant : Corporation, Choudhury Bazar, Cuttack 2. The respondent: ACIT(TDS-II), Bhubaneswar. 3. The CIT(A)- Cuttack 4. Pr.CIT- Cuttack 5. DR, ITAT, Cuttack BY ORDER, 6. Guard file. //True Copy// SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, Cuttack