LAUREL SECURITIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 58(3), TDS, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1465/KOL/2016Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 July 2018AY 2002-032 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue to the Assessing Officer for verification, noting that the payee had already been assessed on the interest income and that the lower authorities had not considered relevant documents. The assessee was to be given an opportunity of hearing.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to deduct TDS on interest paid to a payee. While a portion of the interest was covered by a certificate, the remaining amount was not. The Assessing Officer treated the assessee as being in default.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was in default for non-deduction of TDS on interest payment, and whether the lower authorities properly considered all relevant documents and opportunities for the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201(1),Section 201(1A),Section 197(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “D” KOLKATA

Before: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S.Godara

PER S.S.Godara, Judicial Member:

- This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2002-03 arises against Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-24, Kolkata’s order dated 15.04.2016, upholding the Assessing Officer’s action treating it to be an assessee in default on account of non deduction of TDS on interest amount of ₹1,02,342/- paid to the payee M/s Forward Looking Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd. thereby raising the demand in question of ₹34,965/-, involving proceedings u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2.

There does not appear to be any dispute per se between the parties so far as the basic fact is that assessee has not deducted TDS amount on the impugned interest amount paid to the company payee M/s Forward Looking Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd., to the tune of ₹3,15,374/-. The Assessing Officer noticed assessee’s above failure in ITA No.1465/Kol/2016 A.Y. 2002-03 Laurel Securities Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO Wd-58(3) TDS, Kol. Page 2 not deducting TDS. He accepted the fact that an amount of ₹2,13,932/- paid as interest was very well covered as per necessary certificate u/s 197(1) of the Act. There was no such certificate regarding balance interest figure of ₹1,02,342/-. The Assessing Officer accordingly treated the assessee to be an assessee in default u/s 201 and 201(1A) of the Act to compute the demand in question of ₹2,873/- and ₹14,092/-; totaling to ₹34,965/- as upheld in course of the lower appellate proceedings.

3.

Learned Authorized Representative vehemently contends for sometime that its payee’s Form No.15AA dated 18.03.2002 issued up to 31.03.2002 very well covered the remaining payments in question as well. He then informs us that the said payee has already been assessed qua the corresponding interest income as per its audited accounts, computation and income tax return acknowledgement forming part of the case file. He fails to dispute the fact that all these documents relevant for necessary verification have nowhere been considered by the lower authorities. We therefore restore the instant issue back to the Assessing Officer for necessary verification as per law u/s 201(1) 1st proviso as per law after affording adequate opportunity of hearing to assessee. This assessee’s appeal is accepted for statistical purpose.

4.

Order pronounced in open court on 31/07/2018 (लेखा सद!य) (#या$यक सद!य) (P.M.Jagtap) (S.S.Godara) Accountant Member Judicial Member *Dkp-Sr.PS %दनांकः- 31/07/2018 कोलकाता / Kolkata आदेश क" ""त"ल"प अ"े"षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. अपीलाथ"/Appellant-Laurel Securities Pvt. Ltd. 313, Todi Chambers, 2, Lal Bazar Street, Kolkata-001

2.

""यथ"/Respondent-ITO Wd-58(3), TDS, 10B, Middleton Row, 8th Fl, Kolkata-71 3. संबं(धत आयकर आयु+त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु+त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. ,वभागीय "$त$न(ध, आयकर अपील"य अ(धकरण कोलकाता / DR, ITAT, Kolkata 6. गाड0 फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से, // Sr. Private Secretary, Head of Office/DDO आयकर अपील"य अ(धकरण, कोलकाता

More judgments on Section 201(1)

All 3,835 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →