9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 599X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Director General - no doubt the intimations that are issued u/s 154 of the Act - But, when the scheme itself envisages that the intimation must be issued so as to call for a reply from the deductor then it cannot be in the form of a demand u/s 156 of the Act - what is envisaged is that before any order is passed under Clause (6) of the Scheme, an intimation has to be sent to the deductor, which is in the nature of a showcause notice and after receiving a reply from the deductor and considering the same, an order has to be passed, then it would be deemed to be a notice of demand under Section 156 of the Act. Instead of directing the respondents-authorities to re-initiate fresh proceedings u/s 154 of the Act, for the sake of convenience of the parties, the annexures could be construed as show cause notices or intimations as stated in sub-clause (3) of Clause (6) of the Scheme to which the petitioner is at liberty to reply within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and on receipt of the reply by the respondents- Authorities, the same shall be considered in accordance with law and a speaking order be passed thereon – Decided in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... awing my attention to the impugned annexures, it was contended that those annexures are stated to be intimations under Section 154 of the Act, but in effect they are orders enhancing the demand and the impugned annexures itself state that the intimations have to be treated as notice of demand under Section 156 of the Act. In this context, it was contended that there being violation of the principles of natural justice, the impugned annexures would have to be quashed and the Respondent-Authorities have to re-do the proceeding under Section 154 of the Act by complying with the mandatory requirements of that provision. 5. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents contended that the impugned intimations have been issued in terms of the scheme which has been revised by the Ministry of Finance in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 200-A of the Act, which deals with the Processing of Statements of Tax Deducted at Source. The said scheme has been issued by way of notification dated 15.01.2013, by which the Centralized Processing Cell (TDS) has been established at Ghaziabad and this scheme itself is called 'Centralised Processing of Statements of Tax Deducted at Sourc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... XTRAORDINARY, PART II, SECTION 3, SUB-SECTION (II) OF DATED THE 15TH JANUARY, 2013] GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISKTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE [CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES] NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 15th January, 2013 S.O. 169 (E) - In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of Section 200A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Board of Direct Taxes hereby makes the following scheme for centralized processing of statements of tax deducted at source, namely :- 1. Short title and commencement- (1) This scheme may be called the Centralised Processing of Statements of Tax Deducted at Source Scheme, 2013. (2) It shall come into force on the date of its publication in the Official Gazette. 2. Definitions.- (1) In this scheme, unless the context otherwise requires,- a) Act means the Income-tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961); b) Assessing officer means the Assessing Officer who is ordered or directed under Section 120 of the Act to exercise or perform all or any of the powers and functions conferred on, or assigned to, an Assessing Officer under Chapter XVII of the Act; ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ductor in the manner specified under sub-section (1) of Section 200-A of the Act after taking into account the information contained in the correction statement of tax deducted at source, if any, furnished by the deductor before the date of processing. (2) The Commissioner may - a) adopt appropriate procedure for processing of the statement of tax deducted at source; or b) decide the order of priority for processing of the statement of tax deducted at source based on administrative requirements. 6. Rectification of mistake,- (1) An Income-tax authority of the Cell may, with a view to rectifying any mistake apparent from the record under Section 154 of the Act, on its own motion or on receiving an application from the deductor, amend any order or intimation passed or sent by it under the Act. (2) An application for rectification shall be furnished in the form and manner specified by the Director General. (3) Where a rectification has the effect of reducing the refund or increasing the liability of the deductor, an intimation to this effect shall be sent to the deductor electronically by the Cell and the reply of the deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ection (1) of Section 282 of the Act. (2) The date of posting of any communication under sub-paragraph (1) in the electronic mail or electronic account of the deductor in the portal of the Cell shall be deemed to be the date of service of such communication. (3) The intimation, orders and notices shall be computer generated and need not carry physical signature of the person issuing it. 11. Power to specify procedure and processes,- The Director General may specify procedures and processes, from time to time, for effective functioning of the Cell in an automated and mechanized environment, including specifying the procedure, formats, standards and processes in respect of the following matters, namely,- a) form of correction statement of tax deducted at source; b) the manner of verification of correction statement of tax deducted at source; c) receipt of correction statement of tax deducted at source; d) form of rectification application; e) the manner of verification of rectification application; f) receipt and processing of rectification applications in the Cell; g) the mode a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Clause (3) of sub-section (1) of Section 154 of the Act. In that context, Clause (6) of the scheme is pertinent, which is extracted above. Sub-clause (1) of Clause (6) of the scheme says that the income tax authority in order to rectify any mistake apparent from the record under Section 154 of the Act either on its own motion or on receiving an application from the deductor. The format of the application for rectification is as stipulated in sub-clause (2). Sub-clause (3) is relevant for the purpose of the case, which states that, where a rectification has the effect of reducing the refund or increasing the liability of the deductor, an intimation to that effect shall be sent to the deductor electronically by the Cell and the reply of the deductor shall be furnished in the form and manner specified by the Director General. In this context, the argument of the counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned intimations are in the nature of demands made under Section 156 of the Act, as it expressly states so and even what is stipulated in sub-clause (3) of Clause (6) that an intimation calling for a reply has not been given to the petitioner, instead impugned annexures straightway ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
