Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Amritsar
Punjab State Forest Development ... vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Cpc( Tds), ... on 26 July, 2019
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
BEFORE SH. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
SH. N.K.CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 391, 392, 393 & 394/Asr/2019
nd
A.Ys : 2015-16 (2 Q), 2015-16 (3rd Q), 2015-16 (4th Q) & 2016-17(1st Q)
Punjab State Forest Development Vs. CIT,
Corporation, Bathinda CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad
[PAN:AABCP2806R]
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by: Sh. Vinamar Gupta (CA)
Respondent by: Sh. Dheeraj Garg (DR)
Date of hearing: 26.07.2019
Date of pronouncement: 26.07.2019
ORDER
PER: VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. These are 4 appeals filed by the assessee against the consolidated order of ld. CIT(A) dated 15.03.2019 confirming the levy of fees under section 234E of the Act.
2. At the outset, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee is a Government Corporation under the Punjab Government and dealing with the Forest Department and has sold timber in the market and has collected TCS from the buyer's timber. It was further submitted that due to pure oversight, the assessee has filed the quarterly TCS returns in Form 26Q instead of Form 27EQ. It was further submitted that there is no dispute that the Form 26Q has been filed well before the prescribed due date of filing the quarterly returns. It was further submitted that later on, when assessee realize its mistake, it filed returns in Form 26EQ for the respective quarters and on the 2 ITA No. 391, 392, 393 & 394/Asr/2019 Punjab State Forest Development Corporation Ltd., Bathinda vs. CIT, Ghaziabad processing on the said returns, the Central Processing Centre of the Department has raised the demand u/s 234E relating to late filing of the quarterly TCS returns. It was submitted that being a technical breach on the part of the assessee in filing the TCS return in Form 26Q instead of Form 27EQ, the same is covered by section 292B as the TCS returns originally filed were in substance and effect in conformity with and according to the intent and purpose of the Act.
3. The ld. DR is heard who has relied on the order of the lower authorities.
4. We have heard the rival contentions and purused the material available on record. We find force in the arguments so advanced by the ld. AR that where the transactions so reported in Form 26Q are identical to the transactions subsequently reported in Form 27EQ for the respective quarters, the assessee has substantially complied with the requirements of filing of quarterly TCS return. Merely by filing the returns in different form then one which is prescribed does not cause any prejudice to the Revenue. Further, the assessee has also contended that the Forms 26Q originally filed were well within the prescribed time limit and TCS has been duly deposited. We accordingly decide the matter in favour of the assessee subject to verification of the transactions as reported in Form 26Q and Form 27EQ. The matter is accordingly set-aside to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for the limited purposes of verification. The assessee is also directed to file the reconciliation statement in terms of transactions as reported in Form 26Q as well as 27EQ.
In the result, all the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed in light of above directions.
3 ITA No. 391, 392, 393 & 394/Asr/2019Punjab State Forest Development Corporation Ltd., Bathinda vs. CIT, Ghaziabad Order pronounced in the open Court on 26.07.2019.
Sd/- Sd/-
(N.K.CHOUDHRY) (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated: 26.07.2019
Ganesh Kr. PS
Copy of the order forwarded to:
(1) Punjab State Forest Development Corporation Ltd., Bathinda
(2) CIT CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad
(3) The CIT(A)-Bathinda
(4) The CIT concerned
(5) The SR DR, I.T.A.T., Amritsar
True copy
By order