The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Allahabad Bench stores issue back to AO for denovo adjudication concerning the deduction of TDS on payments made towards Suspense Service Expenses and Rent.
The assessee, Public Service Commission is a State Organization being an autonomous body that came into existence by the power conferred in Article 315 to 323 of the Constitution of India and is known as the Uttar Pradesh Service Commission.
The assessee was established to conduct examination and selection of candidates for the purpose of Provincial Services.
The main grievance of the Revenue is that CIT(A) has passed a nonspeaking cryptic order while granting relief to the assessee under the heads Honorarium, Stationary, and Forms, Office Furniture, and Equipment, Advertisement Sales and Services.
The CIT(A) granted the relief to the assessee based on the computation of default in deduction of income tax at source under heads as computed by AO in its remand report submitted by AO to CIT(A) in appellate proceedings in relation to default originally computed by AO in its order passed under section 201(1) and 201(1A).
It has been admitted by AO during remand proceedings vide para 4 of remand report submitted by AO to CIT(A) that originally the AO while passing its order under section 201(1) and 201(1A), has considered the figures of expenditure under different heads based on the treasury information, but since the assessee raised its grievance before CIT(A) that wrong amounts of expenditure were considered by AO while passing its order, the AO during remand report proceedings verified the amounts from the 11-C register maintained by the assessee and accordingly correct amounts were considered by the AO for computing default in deduction of income tax at source, which led to reduction of default amount for non-deduction of income tax at source under aforesaid heads.
The coram of Vijay Pal Rao and Ramit Kochar while dismissing the appeal of the revenue held that if at any stage, it is found by Revenue that the AO has considered wrong amounts of expenditure under different heads while submitting remand report to CIT(A) during appellate proceedings, liberty is granted to Revenue to file MA for recall of this order, provided it is based on cogent evidence or reasons.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. We welcome your comments at info@taxscan.in
