2015 (1) TMI 291 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification of order u/s. 200A/154 - TDS was not showing in the computers system - Held that - The AO (TDS) should give appeal effect to these orders within 2 months of receipt of the order immediately by issuing necessary notices u/s. 154 of the Act to the appellant and rectifying the orders as per law. If the rectification is not possible in computer, the Assessing Officer should manually rectify by passing suitable order in a format so that a mass rectification can be completed quickly. The AO (TDS) should give opportunity of being heard to the appellant before rectifying these orders and listening to the grievances of the appellant. AO is directed to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of being heard to the respective assesses. The assesses are at further liberty furnish evidence, if any, to substantiate their claim. Since the assesses have been granted fair opportunity, therefore, the time limit of completion within two months, as directed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), is withdrawn - Following decision of Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 51(1), Versus M/s Unitech Wireless (Tamil Nadu) Pvt. Ltd., & Others 2012 (10) TMI 365 - ITAT, DELHI - Decided against revenue.

Summary

Issues involved:
Appeals by Revenue against orders of CIT(A) directing corrective action by AO under ITD system or manually, maintainability of appeals under section 246A, direction by CIT(A) to rectify mistakes within two months, consistency with previous ITAT Delhi Bench decision.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Appeals by Revenue against CIT(A) orders
The batch of 23 matters consisted of 22 appeals by the Revenue and one C.O. of an assessee against different orders of the Ld. CIT(A). The challenge by the Revenue related to the direction given by the CIT(A) to the A.O. to rectify mistakes within two months, either through the ITD system or manually. The appeals were dismissed as the orders passed by the A.O. under section 200A of the IT Act were deemed not appealable under section 246A. The C.O. supported the order of CIT(A).

Issue 2: Maintainability of appeals under section 246A
The argument presented was that since the appeals were not maintainable, the CIT(A) was not justified in giving any direction while dismissing the appeals. The contention was that the order of the CIT(A) should be modified to reflect the non-maintainability of the appeals.

Issue 3: Consistency with previous ITAT Delhi Bench decision
The ITAT, Delhi Bench had previously passed a consolidated order on a similar matter on 1st October 2012. The decision in that case was cited as a precedent, where the appeals were dismissed with certain directions. The current appeals were disposed of following the same view as taken in the previous case, thereby upholding the order of the CIT(A) and dismissing the appeals of the Revenue.

In conclusion, the ITAT Delhi upheld the order of the CIT(A) directing corrective action by the AO, despite the appeals being deemed not maintainable under section 246A. The decision was based on consistency with a previous ITAT Delhi Bench ruling and ensuring fairness by providing the assesses with an opportunity to be heard. The appeals of the Revenue were dismissed, and the C.O. of the assessee was also dismissed as it became infructuous.