9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear that ended on 31.03.1998, the assessee received rents from its properties. While remitting the rent, the tenants had deducted tax and deposited the same with the banks. The following are the details of the tax deducted from the rents: - Sl. No. Name T.D.S. Amount Deposited with 1. M/s. Roland Berger Rs. 7,27,353/- PNB, G.K. I, New Delhi 2. Enterprise Nexus communication Pvt. Ltd. Rs. 1,50,000/- S.B.I., Worli (N), Mumbai Rs. 8,77,353/- 2. In the return of income filed on 10.10.2000, the petitioner mentioned in Part-III of the return that an amount of Rs. 8,77,353/-, being the tax deducted at source as above, was refundable. Apparently, the return was neither processed under Section 143(1) nor any no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... being a philanthropic or charitable organization established for the benefit of the differently-abled and for the empowerment of women, the refusal to refund the tax deducted at source has caused genuine financial hardship and has impeded the charitable activities of the petitioner. It is further urged that the relevant tax deduction certificates and certificates from the banks for deposit of the tax were furnished to the respondent and in these circumstances, the order passed by the respondent refusing to condone the delay in filing the return of income and in refunding the TDS was arbitrary and illegal and, therefore, a direction be issued to the respondent to refund the amount along with interest till date. 4. The contention of the reve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed no cause for the delay in filing the return. It is emphasised that the return was filed without the original TDS certificates and in the absence of the original certificates, no refund can be granted since there is no proof for making the deposit. It is further stated that the certificates from the banks furnished by the assessee were bereft of any detail and therefore the deposit cannot be traced to the credit of the petitioner and, therefore, no action can be taken on the basis of such certificates. It is, thus, urged on behalf of the revenue that the petition be dismissed. 5. It is not disputed by the petitioner that the return of income was filed beyond the time limit prescribed by Section 139(1) and even Section 139(4) of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in the column showing the enclosures to the return of income, the petitioner has not mentioned that any original TDS certificates were enclosed. Therefore, there is no acceptable evidence for the tax deducted at source. In the course of the correspondence with the income tax authorities the petitioner was able to file only copies of the TDS certificates in Form No.16A, but the originals were not produced or filed. It would be contrary to law to grant refunds on the basis of the photocopies of the certificates without the originals being produced for verification or filed. The furnishing of the bank certificates also does not take the case of the petitioner further because a perusal of the certificate issued on 13.03.2006 by the Punjab Nat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner for the delay in filing the return of income is that one Bhai Mohan Singh, the treasurer of the petitioner, who signed the belated return of income was out of the country. This reason was not found correct by the respondent, since he noticed that the Form No.10, which was annexed to the return of income was dated 30.10.1998 and was signed by the treasurer himself. He had also signed the audited accounts attached to the return and these accounts were signed on 21.05.1999; therefore the reasons for the delay in filing the return of income were found to be factually incorrect by the respondent even on the basis of return and the annexures thereto. In these circumstances, the respondent has rightly stated that the explanation of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are unable to say that the petitioner has been treated unfairly or that the decision of the respondent suffers from any irrationality or perversity. All the relevant facts have been taken into consideration in the decision making process. In the circumstances of the case, we are unable to say that the decision not to condone the delay is arbitrary or is so irrational that no person properly instructed as to the facts and the legal position would have come to such a conclusion. Moreover, the petitioner has not been able to produce the original TDS certificates at any point of time. Thus, even if for argument's sake the delay is treated as explained, no relief can be granted to the petitioner as prayed for, in the absence of the original TDS ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
