9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f rectification, but the orders u/s 200A of the Act as rectified. Therefore though demand was raised in intimation passed u/s 200A of the IT Act, the same demand continued in the intimation passed u/s 154 of IT Act. Hence, we are of the view that assessee has a legal right in filing an appeal against the said intimation. Moreover, there is no restriction/prohibition in challenging the intimation passed u/s 154 of the IT Act without challenging the intimation passed u/s 200A. For the aforesaid reasons, we set aside the CIT(A) orders for 2011-12 2012-13 and remand the case to him. CIT(A) is directed to pass orders on merits/grounds raised before him for asst. Years 2011-12 2-12-13. Appeal filed by assessee is allowed for statistical pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... law applicable. 2.2. The learned AO has erred in not appreciating that the flat rate of tax at 20% on gross payment cannot be automatically applied in the case of deduction of tax at source under section 192 of the Act. 2.3. In any case and without prejudice, the exercise undertaken by the AO by adopting the rate of 20% under section 206AA and consequently raising the demand of tax in an intimation issued under section 200A is beyond the scope of the section 200A and hence bad in law and liable to be quashed. 2.4. The learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground that the demand of ₹ 1,24,130/- has not been raised vide order under section 154 but vide order under section 200A of the Act. 2.5. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the deductor since as per section 191 where income tax has not been deducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter XVII B, income tax shall be payable by the assessee i.e., payee directly. 2.11. On facts and circumstances of the case and law applicable, short deduction of TDS amounting to ₹ 67,184 should be deleted. Levy of Interest on short deduction 2.12 The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the levy of interest on short deduction amounting to ₹ 56,950. On facts and circumstances of the case and law applicable, interest on short deduction is not leviable. The appellant denies its liability to pay interest on short deduction. 3. Prayer 3.1. In view of the above and other grounds to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hort tax deduction at source with respect to Form 24Q for 4th quarter of the Financial Year 2011-12 has been quantified at ₹ 73,929/-. Interest on such short deduction of tax at source has been quantified at ₹ 53,874/-. Thus, the net sum payable has been determined at ₹ 1,27,800/- [i.e 73,929 53,874]. The assessee had downloaded and analysed the justification report of TRACES to ascertain the reasons for short TDS as mentioned u/s 200A of IT Act. In the intimation passed u/s 200A, TDS has been computed at flat rate of 20% as per sec. 206AA of the IT Act on entire salary on account of invalid PAN furnished by employees of the assessee. In other words, TDS is computed on entire taxable income of the employees without reducin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 24,130/- related to short deduction of tax and consequent interest in relation to the above referred two employees was raised by the AO while passing order under Section 200A of the Act and not through the order under Section 154 of the Act. Since no such demand of ₹ 1,24,130/- has been raised in the order under Section 154 of the Act, so the relevant order which was required to be challenged in appeal for such demand was the order under Section 200A of the Act and not the order under Section 154 of the Act. Vide order under Section 154 of the Act the AO has only looked into the corrections filed by the appellant in its correction statement and no fresh demand related to short deduction of tax or consequential interest has been raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e to CIT(A) with direction to consider the assessee s case on merits. The ld DR strongly relied on orders of IT authorities. 9. We have heard rival submissions advanced by both sides and perused the material on record. We are in view that the CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal solely for the reason that demand has been raised vide intimation u/s 200A of IT Act and assessee ought to have filed appeals against the same. Once an order of rectification is passed u/s 154 of IT Act, the original order passed u/s 200A itself is modified and what remain thereafter is, not the order of rectification, but the orders u/s 200A of the Act as rectified. Therefore though demand was raised in intimation passed u/s 200A of the IT Act, the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
