9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1115X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was failure on the part of the assessee company to deduct tax at source from the value of the said perquisite, we are of the view that it was rightly treated by the A.O. as the assessee in default for such non or short deduction of tax at source under section 201(1) and interest under section 201(1A) was also correctly charged in accordance with law. - Decided against assessee. - I.T.A. Nos. 1234 & 1236/Kol/2016 - - - Dated:- 20-6-2018 - Shri P. M. Jagtap, AM and Shri A.T. Varkey, JM Shri A.K. Tibrewal, FCA appearing on behalf of the Assessee Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT appearing on behalf of the Revenue ORDER Per P. M. Jagtap, A. M. These two appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reated it as the assessee in default for such short deduction amounting to ₹ 8,58,885/- and ₹ 15,75,200/- for A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively vide his orders passed under section 201(1) of the Act. He also charged interest of ₹ 3,26,376/- and ₹ 4,84,086/- under section 201(1A) for A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively and raised a total demand of ₹ 11,85,261/- and ₹ 20,59,286/- vide his order passed under section 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act for A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13 respectively. 3. Against the orders passed by the A.O. under section 201(1)/201(1A) for both the years under consideration, appeals were preferred by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) and the action of the A.O. in treating it as the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g attended conditions. Somebody responsible for making payments and income calculation for the purpose of TDS liability has rushed to treat the sums as exempt from income tax. As there is no material even to suggest that the sums were for performing official work, I have no basis to interfere with the AO s order, which is confirmed. The grounds, therefore, are not allowed. 5. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. Besides reiterating the submissions made before the authorities below on behalf of the assessee, the learned counsel for the assessee has contended that the amount in question paid by the assessee company to its employees towards car running and maintenance e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ase, the requisite details as specified in Clause (B) of sub-rule 2 of rule 3 of Income Tax Rules 1962 were not maintained by the assessee and this being the undisputed position, we find ourselves in agreement with the authorities below that the value of perquisite provided by the assessee company to its employees in the form of reimbursement of car running and maintenance charges was chargeable to tax in their hands and the assessee was liable to deduct tax at source from the said value. Since there was failure on the part of the assessee company to deduct tax at source from the value of the said perquisite, we are of the view that it was rightly treated by the A.O. as the assessee in default for such non or short deduction of tax at sourc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
