State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission
Pnb Housing Finance Ltd. vs Prem Sagar Dhingra on 24 March, 2015
1
STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
PUNJAB, DAKSHIN MARG, SECTOR-37A, CHANDIGARH
FIRST APPEAL No.1367 of 2014
Date of Institution: 07.10.2014
Date of Decision : 24.03.2015
PNB Housing Finance Ltd., 1st Floor, Nirmal Complex, G.T.Road, Civil
Lines, Jalandhar, through its Legal Manager Sh. Rajnish Gupta.
.....Appellant/Opposite Party
VERSUS
Prem Sagar Dhingra r/o 21, Vasant Vihar, Jalandhar.
.....Respondent/Complainant
First Appeal against the order dated
02.09.2014 passed by the District
Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum,
Jalandhar.
Quorum:
Hon'ble Mr.Justice Gurdev Singh, President
Sh. Baldev Singh Sekhon, Member
Smt. Surinder Pal Kaur, Member Present:
For the appellant : Sh. Mohinder Singh, Advocate For the respondent : Sh. Prem Sagar Dhingra, in person BALDEV SINGH SEKHON, MEMBER This appeal has been filed by the appellant/opposite party (in short 'the OP') against the order dated 02.09.2014 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalandhar (in short "District Forum"), vide which the complaint filed by the respondent/complainant was allowed and OP was directed to pay Rs.7,738/- to the complainant along with Rs. 3,000/- in lump sum on 2 F.A. No. 1367 of 2014 account of compensation and litigation expenses within one month from the date of receipt of copy of the order, failing which OP was held liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum after the expiry of said period of one month till its payment.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that complainant got issued two FDRs (CDR) from the OP on 5.11.2008 for Rs.2,50,000/- each with following details :
Deposit No. Period Interest Maturity Maturity Rate Date Value CD 1101 60 M 10.75% 05.11.13 Rs.4,22,003/-
CD 1100 60 M 10.75% 05.11.13 Rs.4,22,003/-
However, on maturity OP issued two cheques dated 5.11.2013 for Rs. 4,01,247/- and Rs. 4,01,305/- in favour of the complainant against the maturity value of Rs.4,22,003/- in each case. The complainant obtained the detailed statement of the said CDR Account from OP and, after going through the same, found that total credit reflected in his account statement was Rs.4,18,139/- and Rs. 4,18,129/- respectively. On enquiry, he was informed that the said cheques were issued against the maturity value after deducting the TDS. The complainant pointed out to the OP that the total credit in the account should have been Rs. 4,22,003/- in each account as such there was a difference of Rs. 3,864/- and Rs. 3,874/- in two of his accounts. He requested the OP to pay the remaining unpaid amount of Rs. 3,478/- and Rs. 3,487/- (Total Rs. 7,738/-), after deducting a TDS of Rs.386/- and Rs.387/- from the respective accounts. A legal notice 3 F.A. No. 1367 of 2014 dated 21.12.2013 was also got served upon the OP but still it failed to make the payment of Rs.7,738/-. In the complaint filed before District Forum, he sought directions to the OP to make him payment of Rs.7,738/- and further to pay Rs.50,000/- towards compensation for harassment and mental tension. Payment of Rs.5,000/- as losses suffered due to visits to the OP and other expenses alongwith Rs.5,000/- as litigation charges were also prayed.
3. Upon notice, OP contested the complaint and denied every allegation made against it. It was admitted that the two FDR's (CDR) were issued in the name of the complainant on 5.11.2008 for a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- each, for five years having maturity date as 5.11.2013 and maturity amount of Rs.4,22,003.00 each subject to applicable TDS provisions. It was however, pleaded that on maturity, the actual amount was released to the complainant on 05.11.2013, after deduction of TDS as per law. Interest accrued on the deposit was credited to the respective accounts on annual basis after deduction of TDS and there is no provision for allowing further interest on the TDS deduction. The TDS and the interest part were clearly reflected in the account statement of the complainant. As per Section 194-A of the Income Tax Act, if the total interest earned on all fixed deposits in a bank is more than Rs.10,000/- in a financial year, the banks are bound to deduct the income tax at source (TDS). TDS is deductable on interest accrued (but not yet paid) at the end of the financial year i.e. on 31st March every year. There was no error in releasing the amount after deducting the TDS as per rules. Dismissal of the complaint was prayed.
4F.A. No. 1367 of 2014
4. Parties led their evidence by way of affidavits and documents before the District Forum, which after going through the same, allowed the complaint, in aforesaid terms.
5. Aggrieved by this order, the OP has come up in appeal on the ground that the learned District Forum has failed to give any reason how the complainant was entitled to Rs.7738/- alongwith interest and litigation costs. OP has deducted the TDS and the same was deposited with the Income Tax Department and, thus, it was not liable to pay any interest on the TDS amount.
On the other hand, the complainant, who was present in person, submitted that the learned District Forum has correctly reached the conclusion that an amount of Rs.7738/- were refundable to the complainant alongwith interest.
6. We have thoroughly gone through the pleadings of the parties, have carefully perused the evidence on record and heard submission of the learned counsel of the parties.
7. It is the admitted case of the parties that the complainant got issued two FDRs of Rs. 2,50,000/- each from OP on 5.11.2008 for a period of 60 months having rate of interest @ 10.75% per annum compounded half yearly. Those FDRs were to mature on 5.11.2013. As per the details mentioned on the FDRs (Ex.C-1 & Ex.C-2) the maturity amount was Rs. 4,22,003/-; of each FDR. The grievance of the complainant is that OP issue two cheques dated 5.11.2013 for Rs.4,01,247/- and Rs. 4,01,305/- which were less than the payable amounts mentioned on the FDRs. It was not disputed by him that TDS was deductible on the interest accrued during financial year in case it 5 F.A. No. 1367 of 2014 exceeded Rs.10,000/- per annum. He contended that OP released Rs.3478/- and Rs.3487/- (Total Rs.7738/-) less than the payable amount after reducing from the maturity amount mentioned in the FDR, TDS. He placed on record his own calculation sheet in which the interest accrued at the end of the each half year has been stated. It was argued that TDS is to be worked out on the total interest accrued during the period and was to be deducted from the maturity amount of Rs.4,22,003/-. He calculated total interest accrued as Rs.1,61,484/- on which the TDS of Rs.16,834/- was deductible in each case. Thus, Rs. 4,05,169/- were payable to him after deduction of the TDS in each case.
8. The OPs have also proved on record its calculation sheet as Ex.OP-1. On comparing the two statements i.e. one submitted by the complainant and other by the OP, it is found that cumulative interest without deduction of TDS tallies in both sheets. The details of the TDS deducted by OP as per Section 194-A of the Income Tax Act also tallies with the amount mentioned by the complainant in his statement. The contention of the complainant that the TDS is to be deducted on the total amount of the interest accrued i.e. Rs.1,61,484/- and the same is to be deducted from the maturity amount of Rs.4,22,308/- is not found to be in order. Admittedly, the TDS is to be deducted on the closure of each financial year on 31st March on the total interest which accrued during that year and the same is to be deposited with the Income Tax Department. Thus, on the first of April every year, the principal amount, on which the interest is to be allowed for the subsequent period is to be reduced, to the extent of TDS deducted by 6 F.A. No. 1367 of 2014 OP. The complainant cannot be allowed to earn interest on the amount, which was already deducted by OP and deposited with the Income Tax Department. Accordingly, we do not find any error in calculation sheet prepared by OP for working out the amount to be released by it to the complainant.
9. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the OP is allowed and the impugned order of the District Forum is set aside. Consequently, the complaint filed by the complainant is dismissed.
10. A sum of Rs.6359/- was deposited by the appellant at the time of filing of the appeal before this Commission. This amount alongwith interest which has accrued thereon, if any, shall be remitted by the registry to the appellant/OP by way of a crossed cheque/demand draft after the expiry of 45 days.
11. The arguments in the case were heard on 13.03.2015 and the order was reserved. Now, the order be communicated to the parties.
12. The appeal could not be decided within the statutory period because of the heavy pendency of the court cases.
(JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH) PRESIDENT (BALDEV SINGH SEKHON) MEMBER (SURINDER PAL KAUR) MEMBER March 24, 2015 KK 7 F.A. No. 1367 of 2014 8 F.A. No. 1367 of 2014