9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 652X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld CIT (A) expressed his inability to accord any relief, beyond the relief accorded in the form of recalculation of the penalty as well as the interest payable u/s 201(1) and 201(1A) of the Act. We are therefore of the opinion that the orders passed by the Ld CIT (A) do not call for any interference. Appeals by the asssessee / LAO are dismissed. - ITA.Nos.336 to 338/Hyd/2013 - - - Dated:- 29-8-2017 - SHRI D. MANMOHAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : Shri G. Chinnaiah, Deputy Tahasildar For The Revenue : Shri V. Sreekar, DR ORDER PER D. MANMOHAN, VP. These three appeals are filed at the instance of the assessee and they are directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Vijayawada. In respect of the A.Y. 2007-2008, the following ground were urged by the assessee. 1. The Hon ble Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals ought not have rejected appellant s claim for relief from TDS short deduction in respect of non-filers of income tax returns, as there is no revenue loss envisaged in case of non-files also, as the non-filers are mainly agriculturists / agricultural labour and not aware of income tax procee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e submitted that there is no discrepancy in the tax deducted at source. It was also submitted that the land was acquired in rural areas and most of the recipients are agriculturists who do not have any other source of income other than agricultural income. In fact houses, which were acquired, were situated in rural areas. The compensation recipients are thousands in number who have left their respective villages and scattered over various villages in Kadapa District and surrounding Districts. Therefore tracing them now is impossible. Under these circumstances collection and recovery of any amount of TDS from the beneficiaries / compensation recipients is almost impossible. It was also stated that the tax deducted by the assessee was proper in the circumstances of the case. 6. The A.O. observed that the Special Deputy Collector / DDO is a responsible person for making various payments by deducting the tax from the payments made whereas, in the instant case, there was short deduction / non-remittance of the TDS into Central Government Account. He has calculated the short deduction and the interest payable as per the chart given in his order for the FY 2006-07 dated 26.10.2007. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Y. 2008-2009 and 2009-10 TDS Officer noticed that there is non-remittance of TDS while paying compensation to the awardees. In response to the notice, the party admitted that his predecessor officer was of the opinion that TDS provisions are applicable only when the total compensation payable to the awardees exceed ₹ 1 lakh. In other words, the wrong interpretation of TDS provisions was accepted by the present incumbent. Accordingly the Assessing Officer worked out the short deduction of tax for the purpose of raising a demand u/s 201(1) of the Act and also computed interest chargeable u/s 201(1A) of the Act on such short deduction. 8. Aggrieved, assessee contended before the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee is a State Government Authority which has no intention to deviate from the provisions of the Act though at the relevant point in time the incumbent Officer might have had misconception which might have resulted into inadvertent errors. It was also contended that land was acquired mainly from the agriculturists, who were living in submerged villages, having agricultural income as their source, which is exempt under the Income Tax Act. The relevant extracts from the statemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled written submissions in support of their stand that it is a bonafide case for which the assessee cannot be treated as defaulter u/s 201(1) of the Act and interest is not chargeable u/s 201(1A) of the Act. It was also submitted, vide letter dated 23.3.2013, that there are double accounting of same items resulting in excess TDS demands. 10. Having perused the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) observed that the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) has not properly deducted tax on the original compensation / enhanced compensation paid to the land owners. In fact the LAO deducted tax on amounts exceeding ₹ 1 lakh, which is not in accordance with law. Thus on reappraisal of the facts and circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) made the following modifications to the orders passed by the TDS Officer. For A.Y. 2007-2008: Date of compensation of payment Amount of compensation paid for lands / struc./Decreetal Charges as per impugned orders Relief of compensation to be allowed to the appellant 194LA 194A Less than ₹ 1 lakh to each claimant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8587 1665068 -- -- TOTAL 7230432 16529315 191456 For A . Y . 2009 - 2010 : Date of compensation of payment Amount of compensation paid for lands / struc./Decreetal Charges as per impugned orders Relief of compensation to be allowed to the appellant 194LA 194A Less than ₹ 1 lakh to each claimant Agricultural land Interest spread over 07.08.2008 4246905 -- 3057010 -- 28.01.2009 22707596 9141759 -- 1817410 13.10.2008 7333356 1886103 -- 692561 13.10.2008 6623817 2351831 -- 129001 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
