PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,KARNAL vs. ITO (TDS), PANCHKULA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2414/DEL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 December 2023AY 2013-14Bench: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), MS. ASTHA CHANDRA (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the NFAC's dismissal for non-prosecution was questionable as it was unclear if notices were properly served. Therefore, the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the NFAC for non-prosecution. The assessee contended that they were not given adequate opportunity of hearing and that tax deduction was not liable after submission of Form 15G/15H.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a due opportunity of hearing by the NFAC and whether tax deduction was required after submitting Form 15G/15H.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 201,Section 201(1A)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & MS. ASTHA CHANDRA

Hearing: 11/12/2023Pronounced: 11/12/2023

BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Punjab National Bank Vs. ITO(TDS) Karnal Panchkula (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. V. Rajakumar, Advocate Respondent by Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Sr DR Date of hearing: 11/12/2023 Date of Pronouncement: 11/12/2023 ORDER

PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 26.05.2023 by NFAC, Delhi pertaining to A.Y.2013-14.

2.

The grievance of the assessee read as under :- 1. dismissing appeal against order passed u/s 201 and 201(1A) of the Act without providing due and adequate opportunity of hearing:

II. confirming the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 201 and 201 (1A) of the Act which was bad both in eyes of law and on facts ignoring the fact that the assessee was not liable to deduct tax after submission of Form 15G/15H.

3.

The appeal is late by 31 days. We have gone through the application for the condonation of delay and are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause for not filing the appeal on time, therefore, the delay is condoned.

4.

A perusal of the order by NFAC show that the appeal has been dismissed for non prosecution though there is mention of issue of notices but whether such notices were served upon the assessee is not known. Therefore, in the interest of justice we deem it fit to restore the appeal to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal afresh on merits of the case and after affording a reasonable and adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.

6.

Decision announced in the open court on 11.12.2023.

More judgments on Section 201

All 1,566 judgments and leading authorities on Section 201 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →