Vital Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT, TDS-CPC, Ghaziabad
[Citation -2019-LL-0913-50]

Citation 2019-LL-0913-50
Appellant Name Vital Construction Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent Name DCIT, TDS-CPC, Ghaziabad
Court ITAT-Delhi
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 13/09/2019
Assessment Year 2011-12
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags charging of interest • late deposit of tds • bank statement
Bot Summary: In ITA No.4536/Del /2016, foll owi ng grounds have bee n rai sed by the assessee: 1. CIT has erred in confirming the charging of interest u/s 201(1A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.20,020/- despite the fact that TDS was deposite d well within time and even bank account of appellant was debited for TDS deposited on 7 t h Octobe r 2010 being the due date for deposit. The short i ssue of the case i s that the assessee has deposi ted the TDS for the month of September 2010 on 07.10.2010. The l d. CIT, total l y ignori ng the fact that the assessee ha s pai d the am ount to the de partment on 7 t h an d such amount has al ready been de bi ted from the account of th e assessee and that the amount is not at the di sposal of the assessee for any purpose for hi s utili zati on, has di rected l evy of i nterest, by doi ng extensive academi c exerci se i nvol ving Rul e 80 of the compi l ati on of the Treasury Rul es, Central Treasury Rul es, CBDT Ci rcul ar No. 261 of 1979, Central Government Account Rul es, 1983, Secti on 3(35) of General Cl auses Act, Interpretati on of Bri ti sh Cal endar and Engli sh Cal endar etc. The l d. CIT further hel d that si nce the amount has refl ected on departmental Onli ne Tax Accounti ng System on 08.10.2010, the assessee i s li abl e to l evy of i nterest. The l ag ti me of the OLTAS of the department cannot be attri buted as the fault of the assessee. As i t i s proved undi sputedl y that the assessee has pai d the amounts on 7 t h , and amounts stands debi ted from the account and t ra nsferred, we here by hol d that no i nterest i s l evi abl e on the assessee as the assessee ha s deposi ted TDS in ti me as per the provi si ons of the Act.


IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES G, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member ITA No. 4536/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 4537/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 ITA No. 4538/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Vital Construction Pvt. Ltd., Vs DCIT, M-11, Middle Circle, Connaught TDS-CPC, Circus, New Delhi-110001 Ghaziabad (U.P.)-201010 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCV8990N Assessee by : Sh. Ajay Bhagwani, CA Revenue by : Sh. N. K. Bansal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 21.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement: 13.09.2019 ORDER Per Bench: present appeal s have been fil ed by assessee agai nst orde rs of l d. CIT(A)-41, New Del hi dated 10.05.2016. 2. Si nce, i ssues i nvol ved in all these appeal s are common, they were heard togeth er and are bei ng di sposed off by common orde r. 3. In ITA No.4536/Del /2016, foll owi ng grounds have bee n rai sed by assessee: 1. That orders passe d by t he Assessing Officer and Commissioner of Income Ta x(Appeals)-41, Ne w Delhi are bad in law and void ab initio. 2 ITA Nos. 4536 to 4538Del/2016 Vital Construction Pvt. Ltd. 2. That on facts and circumstances of case, ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming charging of interest u/s 201(1A) of Income Tax Act, 1961 of Rs.20,020/- despite fact that TDS was deposite d well within time and even bank account of appellant was debited for TDS deposited on 7 t h Octobe r 2010 being due date for deposit. 3. That without prejudice on fact s and ci rcumstance s of case, C IT(A)-41, New Delhi erred in directing t o charge interest for 2 months. 4. short i ssue of case i s that assessee has deposi ted TDS for month of September 2010 on 07.10.2010. copy of bank statement refl ecti ng debi t of amounts on 07.10.2010 was submi tted before Assessi ng Offi cer. Assessi ng Offi cer went ahead l evyi ng i nterest as departmental systems are refl ecting recei pt on 08.10.2010. bank account refl ected to transfer funds on 07.10.2010 whi ch i s not di sputed by any of parti es. 5. However, l d. CIT ( A), total l y ignori ng fact that assessee ha s pai d am ount to de partment on 7 t h d such amount has al ready been de bi ted from account of th e assessee and that amount is not at di sposal of assessee for any purpose for hi s utili zati on, has di rected l evy of i nterest, by doi ng extensive academi c exerci se i nvol ving Rul e 80 of compi l ati on of Treasury Rul es, Central Treasury Rul es, CBDT Ci rcul ar No. 261 of 1979, Central Government Account Rul es, 1983, Secti on 3(35) of General Cl auses Act, Interpretati on of Bri ti sh Cal endar and Engli sh Cal endar etc. l d. CIT (A) further hel d that si nce amount has refl ected on departmental Onli ne Tax Accounti ng System (OLTAS) on 08.10.2010, assessee i s li abl e to l evy of i nterest. 3 ITA Nos. 4536 to 4538Del/2016 Vital Construction Pvt. Ltd. 6. As per provi si ons of Income Tax Act, due date for payment of TDS i s 7 t h of every succeedi ng month. l ag ti me of OLTAS of department cannot be attri buted as fault of assessee. As i t i s proved undi sputedl y that assessee has pai d amounts on 7 t h , and amounts stands debi ted from account and t ra nsferred, we here by hol d that no i nterest i s l evi abl e on assessee as assessee ha s deposi ted TDS in ti me as per provi si ons of Act. 7. appeals are treated as allowed. (Orde r Pronounced i n Open Court on 13/09/2019). Sd/- Sd/- (Amit Shukla) (Dr. B. R. R. Kumar) Judicial Member Accountant Member Dated: 13/09/2019 *Subodh* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR Vital Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT, TDS-CPC, Ghaziabad
Report Error