NARMADASAGAR AGRISEEDS PRIVATE LIMITED,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD, TDS, GANDHINAGAR

PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:-

1. The Hon'ble CIT grossly erred in law and on facts in holding appellant as assessee in default inspite of the fact that the appellant had discharged its liability fully towards the deduction of tax at source and also paid interest thereon under the provisions of the Act, and therefore, no further amount was payable by the Appellant.

2. Without prejudice to above, the Hon'ble CIT grossly erred in law and on facts in raising demand against the appellant for TDS of Rs.5,46,360/-, particularly when the payees to whom the amount has been paid have filed their return of income for the Asst. Year 2017-18 and offered such income for tax, and accordingly, as per the provision of section 201(1), such amount cannot be recovered from the appellant.

3. On perusal of the records, it is observed that the assessee was afforded three opportunities of hearing to furnish details, clarifications, and explanations to substantiate its claim. However, despite being granted multiple opportunities, the assessee sought adjournments and failed to furnish the requisite details or explanations before the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A), based on the material available on record, upheld the action of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Before us, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all necessary details, clarifications, and explanations would be furnished to the Revenue authorities. Hence, in the interest of justice, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for de novo adjudication. The assessee shall submit all the relevant bank statement/submission/document before the Ld.CIT(A) and comply with the notices issued by the revenue authorities without seeking any unnecessary adjournments.