9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 967X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue was not able to demonstrate that the approach of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal was erroneous or perverse or that the findings of fact recorded were based on misreading or misappreciation of evidence on record warranting interference by this court. - Decided against revenue - I. T. A. No. 400 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 4-2-2016 - Ajay Kumar Mittal And Raj Rahul Garg, JJ. For the Appellant : Denesh Goyal, Advocate JUDGMENT Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) against the order dated February 27, 2015 (annexure A-4) passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench A , Chandiga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r sections 12A and 10(23C) of the Act. The person responsible (PR) of the bank admitted the default on his part and deposited the tax deducted at source (TDS) along with interest on March 1, 2013. On asking to furnish the details and proof of deposit of the tax deducted at source into Government account, the person responsible furnished the same, vide letter dated March 1, 2013 and as per the details, the total tax deducted at source of ₹ 22,58,086 along with interest under section 201(1A) of the Act amounting to ₹ 2,14,732, thus, totalling ₹ 24,72,818 was deposited. The assessee had filed its e-TDS statements late for the financial year 2010-11. The matter regarding initiation of penalty proceedings under section 272A(2)( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruary 27, 2015 (annexure A-4) upheld the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal. Hence, the present appeal. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the Revenue and are not impressed with the argument raised by him. 4. Section 194A of the Act relates to deduction of tax at source on interest other than interest on securities . Sub-section (3) of section 194A of the Act provides where the provisions of sub-section (1) relating to deduction of tax at source do not apply. According to sub-clause (f) of clause (iii) thereunder, the provisions of tax deducted at source are not applicable to such income credited or paid to any institution, association or body or class by institutions, associations or bodies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals) had noticed that the action was initiated for levy of penalty under section 271C of the Act for not deducting tax at source in respect of the following four societies : 1. Haryana Rural Roads and Infrastructure Development Agency (HARRIDA) ; 2. Punjab ICT Education Society (Director General School Education Punjab) ; 3. Haryana State Council for Science Technology ; 4. Shri Aurobindo Society. 7. It was observed that in the case of three societies, i.e., Haryana Rural Roads and Infrastructure Development Agency, Punjab ICT Education Society and Haryana State Council for Science and Technology, the assessee was not liable to deduct tax at source on interest paid to the said parties in view of the provisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d it had been able to prove that there was a reasonable cause for the said failure. The relevant findings recorded by the Tribunal read as : 4. We have heard learned representative of both the parties and perused the findings of the authorities below. The learned Depart mental representative relied upon the order of the Assessing Officer. On the other hand, learned counsel for the assessee reiterated the submission made before the authorities below. He has relied upon the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal Chandigarh Bench in I. T. A. No. 267 to 271/Chd/2014 in the case of ITO v. State Bank of Patiala, Kusumpti, Shimla (supra) and relied upon judgment of the hon'ble Himachal Pradesh in the case of CIT (TDS) v. State Bank of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re was a reasonable cause for the said failure. 9. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal on appreciation of material on record have concurrently recorded that the penalty under section 271C of the Act was not leviable upon the assessee and cancelled the said penalty. Further, the Himachal Pradesh High Court in I.T.A. No. 17 of 2014 (CIT (TDS) v. State Bank of Patiala Sectt. Shimla) decided on December 31, 2014 had held that no tax at source is required to be deducted in view of section 194A(3)(iii)(f) of the Act in respect of payments made to any societies which are wholly financed by the Government and the Central Government had issued notification exempting those societies. Learned counsel for the Revenue was not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
