9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1932X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, we are of the opinion, the order passed by the Assessing Officer in these 3 appeals are without valid jurisdiction. The orders stand barred by limitation in these cases. Accordingly, the legal issue raised by the assessee is allowed. Time limits of appeals for the A.Y. 2010-11 - Filing of quarterly statement is in the financial years 2009-10 and 2010-11 - There are 11 appeals in this group and they relates to the assessment year 2010-11. In this bunch of 11 appeals, the financial year in which the TDS statements are filed, covers the financial years 2009-10 and 2010-11. Considering the fact, the last quarter of the statement is filed in the financial year 2010-11, the time limits available to the Assessing Officer to pass an order u/s 3(i) of section 201 of the Act is two years from the end of the said financial year 2010-11. Thus, in that case, the Assessing Officer is under obligation to pass an order in these circumstances by 31st March, 2013. Whereas the Assessing Officer passed the order in these 11 appeals in the year 2016 and 2017 respectively i.e. subsequent to the due date specified in the Act. From this point of view and the interpretation of the Statute, the orders pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erwise, the facts, issues, written submissions and arguments of counsels are similar in all the above 25 appeals and, therefore, we proceed to consolidate all these appeals and dispose of by this composite order. 3. We shall take up the appeal in ITA No.119/PUN/2019 for the assessment year 2009-10 as the lead case for adjudication. ITA No.119/PUN/2019 4. In this appeal, the assessee raised the following grounds :- "1] The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the order passed u/s 201(1) / 201(1A) is valid in law without appreciating the same was barred by limitation. 2] The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that as per the relevant provisions of section 201, the learned A.O. ought to have passed the order u/s 201(1) / 201(1A) before 31.03.2014 and since the said order is passed on 29.03.2016, the same is clearly barred by limitation. 3] Without prejudice, the assessee submits that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of the A.O. in treating the assessee in default u/s 201 without appreciating that on the facts of the case, there was no reason to treat the assessee in default and the demand raised should have been deleted. 4] Assessee submits that wherever th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... still not deducted TDS on the strength of incorrect Form No.15H & 15G filed by the depositors. The Assessing Officer was of the view that all cases where TDS was not deducted, had to be mentioned in the TDS return and appropriate flag of From No.15G/Form No.15H was needed to be filed mentioning the reason for not deducting the TDS. The Assessing Officer contended that by not deducting TDS, on the basis of incorrect Form No.15G & 15H filed by the depositors, the assessee bank had created a leakage of revenue and it was impossible on the part of the Department to find out whether such interest income had been properly offered to tax or not by the respective customers of the Bank. The Assessing Officer referred to Note-6 in Form No.15G as prescribed under the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and was of the view that the Rules have clearly cast responsibility on the deductor/payer to ensure that Form No.15G & 15H should not be accepted if the income credited or paid was likely to exceed the maximum amount not chargeable to tax. 8. The Assessing Officer noted that for this year, the interest on FDRs on which TDS was not deducted by the assessee bank was far in excess of the maximum amount not ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment orders passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) of the Act. The CIT(A), as per discussion given in para 5 and 5.1 of his order, dismissed the said legal ground relying on the decision of Pune Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vodafone Cellular Ltd. (2018) 19 taxmann.com 466 (Pune-Trib). For the sake of completeness, the said para 5.1 of the order of the CIT(A) is extracted hereunder :- "5.1 Ground 1: The case of the appellant is that the order u/s 201(1) & 201(1A) is barred by limitation as it is passed beyond 2 years from the end of the FY in which the TDS returns were filed. This ground is identical to the additional ground 1 raised in case of Bank of India Miraj Branch in appeal no CIT(A)-1/10037/2016-17, which has been decided by me today. I have held in that decision of the appellant's Miraj Branch that the provisions of sec 201(3) as amended w.e.f 01/04/2014 would apply and the time limit available to the AO for passing orders u/s 201(1) would be 7 years from the end of the FY in which the payment was made. I have also held that there is no such time limit prescribed for the order u/s 201(1A). I have held so respectfully following the decision of the Hon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation. The learned CIT(A) has not accepted the said contention of the assessee on the ground that there was an amendment to sub section (3) by Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01.10.2014. As per the amended provisions, the order u/s 201 could be passed within a period of 7 years from the end of the financial year in which the payment has been made. According to the learned CIT(A) the A.O. has passed the order on 29.03.2016 and at that point of time, the period of 7 years was available for passing the order u/s 201(1). Hence, he has held that the order passed u/s 201(1) is valid in law. 3.3] The assessee submits that the learned CIT(A) is not justified in holding that the order passed u/s 201(1) is within the limitation period. As stated above, as per the relevant provisions of sub section (3) of section 201, the A.O. was required to pass the order within a period of 2 years from the end of the financial year in which the statement u/s 200 was filed. Now, as per the said provisions, the time limit for passing the order was up-to 31.03.2014. The assessee submits that by the time the amended provisions of sub section (3) of section 201 was introduced from 01.10.2014, the limitation period o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... H.C. in the above referred cases has held that the order passed u/s 201(1) was barred by limitation since the time limit for passing the order had already expired before insertion of the amendment by Finance Act, 2014. Considering the above decisions, the assessee submits that in the present case the order passed u/s 201(1) is barred by limitation. 3.4] The ld. CIT(A) has referred to the decision of Hon'ble ITAT Pune in the case of Vodafone Cellular Ltd. [91 Taxmann.com 466]. The assessee submits that in that case, the concerned asst. year was 2009-10. The A.O. had passed order u/s. 201(1) on 15.03.2012. The assessee submitted that the order passed u/s. 201(1) was barred by limitation. Hon'ble ITAT held that the assessee had furnished the statements u/s. 200 for all the four quarters. It was held that the order u/s. 201(1) was required to be passed for the first three quarters by 31.03.2011 as per the provisions of subsection (3) of section 201. Since the order was passed on 15.03.2012, the same was held to be barred by limitation. As regards the 4th quarter, it was held by Hon'ble ITAT that since the extended time limit was available, the order passed u/s. 201 was within the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing date of the assessment order and the same is as under :- Sr No ITA NO. ASSESSMENT YEAR BRANCH DATE OF A.O. ORDER 1 ITA 119/PUN/2019 2009-10 PETH VADGAON 29-03-2016 2 ITA 123/PUN/2019 2009-10 SHAHUPURI 29-03-2016 3 ITA 138/PUN/2019 2010-11 ATPADI 24-03-2017 4 ITA 131/PUN/2019 2010-11 CHUYE 22-03-2017 5 ITA 122/PUN/2019 2010-11 ISLAMPUR 23-03-2017 6 ITA 126/PUN/2019 2010-11 JAYSINGPUR 23-03-2017 7 ITA 133/PUN/2019 2010-11 KAWATHE MAHANKAL 22-03-2017 8 ITA 139/PUN/2019 2010-11 MURGUD 22-03-2017 9 ITA 120/PUN/2019 2010-11 PETH VADGAON 22-03-2017 10 ITA 146/PUN/2019 2010-11 SANGLI 22-03-2017 11 ITA 144/PUN/2019 2010-11 SHAHUWADI 24/03/2017 Sr No ITA NO. ASSESSMENT YEAR BRANCH DATE OF A.O. ORDER 1 ITA 121/PUN/2019 2009-10 ISLAMPUR 30-03-2016 2 ITA 125/PUN/2019 2009-10 JAYSINGPUR 29-03-2016 3 ITA 127/PUN/2019 2009-10 MIRAJ 29-03-2016 4 ITA 135/PUN/2019 2010-11 AMRUTNAGAR 22-03-2017 5 ITA 136/PUN/2019 2010-11 ICHALKARANJI 27-03-2017 6 ITA 134/PUN/2019 2010-11 KASBA BAWADA 22-03-2017 7 ITA 129/PUN/2019 2010-11 KHARSUNDI 22-03-2017 8 ITA 132/PUN/2019 2010-11 KOLHAPUR MAIN 27-03-2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TH VADGAON Q1 11/07/2008 Q4 12/06/2010 2 ITA 123/PUN/2019 2009-10 SHAHUPURI Q2 06/06/2012 Q3 13/06/2009 Q4 03/08/2010 3 ITA 138/PUN/2019 2010-11 ATPADI Q1 26/03/2010 Q2 16/04/2010 Q3 16/04/2010 4 ITA 131/PUN/2019 2010-11 CHUYE Q1 25/07/2009 Q2 27/10/2009 Q4 23/04/2010 5 ITA 122/PUN/2019 2010-11 ISLAMPUR Q1 03/08/2009 Q2 10/11/2009 Q3 20/01/2010 6 ITA 126/PUN/2019 2010-11 JAYSINGPUR Q3 15/01/2010 Q4 10/06/2010 7 ITA 133/PUN/2019 2010-11 KAWATHE MAHANKAL Q2 29/03/2010 Q3 15/02/2010 Q4 27/04/2010 8 ITA 139/PUN/2019 2010-11 MURGUD Q1 07/12/2009 Q2 17/03/2010 Q4 07/04/2011 9 ITA 120/PUN/2019 2010-11 PETH VADGAON Q1 12/06/2010 Q4 16/10/2010 10 ITA 146/PUN/2019 2010-11 SANGLI Q1 15/04/2010 Q2 12/04/2010 Q3 12/04/2010 11 ITA 144/PUN/2019 2010-11 SHAHUWADI Q4 29/10/2010 15. Before us, on this legal issue relating to limitation of time, ld. Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to sub-section (3) of section 201 of the Act and submitted that the assessee is under obligation to furnish the statements of TDS referred in to section 200 of the Act in 4 quarters ending on 30th June, 30th Septe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me on or before the 31st day of March, 2011." 18. The above provisions are applicable to the year under consideration and they deal with two scenarios, namely, (i) where the statements of the TDS are filed in a financial year and (ii) where such TDS statements are not filed. The proviso provides for the orders of a financial year commencing on or before 1.4.2007. Accordingly, the time limits are specified. In a case where the statements were filed, the due date for passing an order u/s 201(3)(i) of the Act is two years from the end of the financial year in which the statement is filed. In the other group of cases, where the statements were not filed, the due date u/s 201(3)(ii) of the Act is 6 years from the end of the financial year in which the statement is made or credit is given. 19. Set of 14 Appeals: Applying the said time limits to the present set of appeals i.e. Sl.No.1 to 14 of the table given in para 14 of this order, we find there are two assessment years involved in these set of 14 appeals. In this bunch of 14 appeals, the assessee filed quarterly statements for all the 4 quarters in all the appeals. Therefore, we proceed to adjudicate the time limits giving the credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs 2009-10 and 2010-11. Considering the fact, the last quarter of the statement is filed in the financial year 2010-11, the time limits available to the Assessing Officer to pass an order u/s 3(i) of section 201 of the Act is two years from the end of the said financial year 2010-11. Thus, in that case, the Assessing Officer is under obligation to pass an order in these circumstances by 31st March, 2013. 25. Whereas the Assessing Officer passed the order in these 11 appeals in the year 2016 and 2017 respectively i.e. subsequent to the due date specified in the Act. 26. From this point of view and the interpretation of the Statute, the orders passed by the Assessing Officer are without any valid jurisdiction. Accordingly, the said relevant legal issue raised by the assessee in all the 11 appeals are allowed. Consequently, the other additional grounds and grounds raised by the assessee stands dismissed as academic. 27. In the result, all the 11 appeals are partly allowed as above. 28. We shall now take up the other bunch of 11 appeals in the subsequent paragraphs. This is the bunch where the assessee failed to filed TDS statements for all the four quarters in a financial year. Fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rly statements relevant to the assessment year 2010-11 in this bunch of 9 appeals (ITA Nos.138, 131, 122, 126, 133, 139, 120, 146 & 144/PUN/2019) were furnished during the financial years 200910, 2010-11 and 2011-12, as the case may be. Considering the fact, the last quarter of the statement is filed in the financial year 2011-12, the time limits available to the Assessing Officer to pass an order u/s 3(i) of section 201 of the Act is two years from the end of the financial year 2011-12 i.e. 31st March, 2014. 33. Whereas, the Assessing Officer passed orders in this bunch of 9 appeals in the month of 2016 and in the month of 2017 i.e. subsequent to the expiry of the said due date. In any case, these orders were not passed before March, 2014. 34. Considering the above referred interpretation of the Statute as well as the facts available on record, we are of the opinion, the order passed by the Assessing Officer under sub-section 3(i) of section 201 of the Act is without any valid jurisdiction. Accordingly, the adjudication of other additional grounds as well as grounds in these 9 appeals becomes academic exercise. Accordingly, they are dismissed as academic. 35. In the result, all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
