Case Law Details
It is the case of the revenue that the assessee has not furnished correct PAN of Shri Prafull Kumar Jain, PAN mentioned in the original TDS return in respect of the above deductee was not valid/correct. Therefore, the assessing officer was justified in adopting the TDS rate of 20% as against 10%. However, it is seen that the assessee has filed the revised TDS return by quoting the correct PAN which was accepted by the department. We find that it is not a case that PAN of payees available with the assessee was not correct but this is a case where due to typographical error or much volume of entries in TDS return, wrong PAN of only one payee was mentioned in the original TDS return though the payee appears to have supplied correct PAN to the assessee. Similarly, Shri Prafull Kumar Jain is old assessee. Therefore, it is a clerical and typographical error while feeding data in TDS return which led to wrong application of tax rate of 20% in the case of one deductee whereas the assessee might have paid interest to a large number of persons, the assessee being a public sector bank. Since the mistake of quoting wrong PAN has been rectified in the revised TDS return filed by the assessee which has been accepted by the department, therefore, there is no justification in raising a demand on account of short deduction of TDS. The case laws cited (supra) as relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee also support the case of the assessee. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the assessing officer was not justified in adopting the rate of 20% as against 10%. We, therefore, delete the demand of Rs. 8,780 and interest thereon of Rs. 1,025 as made by the authorities below.
Full Text of the ITAT Order is as follows:-
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of learned Commissioner (Appeals), Ujjain, [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] dated 15-12-2015 and pertains to assessment year 2013-14 as against appeal decided in order under section 200A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) dated 25-12-2013 of DCIT(TDS), CPC, Ghaziabad [hereinafter referred to as the AO].
2. Ground no. 1 of the appeal of the assessee reads as under :–
That, on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that the appellant was liable to deduct TDS on interest payment TO Shri Prafulla Kumar Jain (PAN: ABMPJ 1974K) @ 20% as per section 206AA (for non availability of PAN OF Prafulla Kumar), instead of normal TDS rate on interest at 10%.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
