DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,RAEBARELI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 439/LKW/2018Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 July 2019AY 2009-103 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessee admitted to some violations but argued not all payments were subject to TCS. The assessee expressed willingness to pay taxes where defaults occurred and requested another opportunity.

What were the facts?

A survey revealed that the assessee, a District Mining Officer, failed to collect Tax Collected at Source (TCS) on sums received for mining leases and licenses. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeals due to non-submission of details.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee correctly identified payments subject to TCS and whether a fresh opportunity should be granted to determine the correct tax liability.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 206C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH ‘B’, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI A. D. JAIN & SHRI T. S. KAPOOR

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Singh, District Mining
For Respondent: Shri C. K. Singh, D.R
Hearing: 16/07/2019Pronounced: 19/07/2019

PER BENCH:

This is a group of 07 appeals filed by the assessee against the common orders of learned CIT(A) all dated 20/03/2018. The assessee has taken various grounds of appeal, which are identical and these appeals which were heard together and therefore, for the sake of convenience a common and consolidated order is being passed.

2.

The facts noted in the assessment order are that a survey was conducted u/s 133 of the Act on the office of the Director of Geology and Mining at Lucknow and it was found that TCS was not collected on sums received in respect of mining leases and other similar mining rights and licenses from the payers. During the survey, the details of payments

I.T.A. Nos.439 to 445/Lkw/2018 Assessment Years:2009-10 to 2015-16 2

received from mining leases, were collected with the help of the officers and it was seen that assessee had not collected tax at source in various years therefore, order u/s 206C(6&6A) and 206C(7) was passed creating demand in various years starting from assessment year 2009-10 to 2015-16. The CIT(A) disposed of the appeals of the assessee by a common order dated 20/03/2018 wherein he has observed that various opportunities were afforded to the assessee regarding explanation and details of the default and in view of non submission of details, he has dismissed all the appeals.

3.

Before us, the District Mining Officer appeared in person and stated that they have violated in collection of TCS on some contracts but all the payments, collected by the assessee, were not in the nature of royalty and therefore, all amounts collected by it were not subject to TCS and it was prayed that the matter may be set aside so that the assessee could explain and file the details wherever the TCS was applicable. The District Mining Officer further stated that wherever the assessee had defaulted in collection of TCS, it was ready to pay the required taxes.

4.

Learned D. R., on the other hand, relied on the orders of the authorities below.

5.

We have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. We find that the assessment orders have been passed u/s 206 of the Act. The learned CIT(A) has noted in his order that despite various opportunities, the assessee had not provided the details and therefore, he has upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. However, during proceedings before us, the District Mining Officer himself appeared and stated that all the payments received by the assessee were not subject to TCS and the institution was willing to pay taxes wherever default had occurred and has also prayed that another opportunity be given so that the

I.T.A. Nos.439 to 445/Lkw/2018 Assessment Years:2009-10 to 2015-16 3

correct TCS can be deposited. In view of these facts, we deem it appropriate to remit the issue back to the file of the learned CIT(A) with the direction to pass fresh order determining correct tax liability of the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee will be provided reasonable and sufficient opportunities of being heard.

6.

In the result, all the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.

(Order pronounced in the open court on 19/07/2019)

Sd/. Sd/. ( A. D. JAIN ) ( T. S. KAPOOR ) Vice President Accountant Member

Dated:19/07/2019 *Singh

Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. Concerned CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., Lucknow Assistant Registrar

More judgments on Section 206C

All 269 judgments and leading authorities on Section 206C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →