Wp(Md)/8412/2021 Of M/S.ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute Of v. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax

M/s. Ponnaiyah Ramajayam Institute of Science and Technology Trust,Rep. by its Managing Trustee,Mr. M. Ponniyah Nageshwaran...Petitioner in both Wps The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,TDS Circle, Madurai,CR Building, 2, VP, VP Rathinasamy Nadar Road,Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002. Common Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitutionof India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling forthe records relating to the impugned order passed by the respondentin TAN CHEP10485G vide DIN and Order No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2020-21/1031656976(1) and Order No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2020-21/1031658278(1)dated 22.03.2021 for the AY 2014-15 & 2015-16 respectively and quashthe same as illegal and against the principles of natural justiceand fairplay and direct the respondent to grant opportunity to thepetitioner to reconcile and produce Form 26A from the Contractor. COMMON ORDER The prayer sought in the Writ Petitions is for a Writ ofCertiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to theimpugned order passed by the respondent in TAN CHEP10485G vide DINand Order No.ITBA/COM/F/17/2020-21/1031656976(1) and OrderNo.ITBA/COM/F/17/2020-21/1031658278(1) dated 22.03.2021 for theassessment years 2014-15 & 2015-16 respectively and quash the sameas illegal and against the principles of natural justice andfairplay and direct the respondent to grant opportunity to thepetitioner to reconcile and produce Form 26A from the Contractor. 2.In both the cases, assessee is the same and the issue withregard to the assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16 is also same.Therefore, with consent of both sides, both writ petitions are heardhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ together and disposed of, by this common order. 3.It is the case of the petitioner that, there had been TDSinspection, which was conducted at the business premises of thepetitioner assessee on 27.02.2015 and pursuant to which, in order tocomplete the proceedings under Section 201(1)/(1A) of Income TaxAct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “Act” in short), thepetitioner had been given notices during the year 2015 itself andsubsequently, further notice was also given on 30.11.2018 callingfor books of accounts, profit and loss account, balance sheet,ledger, etc from the petitioner assesee. Since there was no responsefrom the petitioner assessee, reminders were issued by the revenueon 08.12.2020, 08.03.2021 and lastly on 12.03.2021. 4.In the last such reminder dated 12.03.2021, the respondentrevenue has issued the following reminder notice:“Kindly refer to the aboveA TDS Inspection was conducted at yourbusiness premises on 27.02.2015, In order tocomplete the proceeding u/s. 201(1)(1A) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, you are requested tosubmit details of TDS made along with ledgercopies and challans with e-TDS statement filedfor all quarters for the F.Y:2013-14 on orbefore 17.03.2021. If you fail to respond/furnish thedetails on the above mentioned date, your casewill be finalized based on the recordsavailable in this office.”Similar notice had been given for the assessment year 2015-16 also. 4.In the last such reminder dated 12.03.2021, the respondentrevenue has issued the following reminder notice:“Kindly refer to the aboveA TDS Inspection was conducted at yourbusiness premises on 27.02.2015, In order tocomplete the proceeding u/s. 201(1)(1A) of theIncome Tax Act, 1961, you are requested tosubmit details of TDS made along with ledgercopies and challans with e-TDS statement filedfor all quarters for the F.Y:2013-14 on orbefore 17.03.2021. If you fail to respond/furnish thedetails on the above mentioned date, your casewill be finalized based on the recordsavailable in this office.”Similar notice had been given for the assessment year 2015-16 also. 5.On receipt of the notices, on behalf of the petitionerassessee, a mail communication had been sent on 16.03.2021 by theassessee. In the said interim reply, the petitioner assessee hasstated that the Chairman of the Institution, due to affect of Covid-19 had been admitted in a hospital and he was in Critical Care Unit,as he was under the ventilator support. Therefore, nobody in theinstitution was able to contact him. Hence, on the said medicalground, as well as the other grounds, in the Institution, theworkers, who were working in the year 2015 since have left theInstitution, it requires some reasonable time to trace out thoserecords, which were required to be submitted and therefore for thesetwo reasons, further time upto 30.04.2021 was sought for on behalfof the petitioner assessee, The relevant letter of the petitionerassessee dated 16.03.3021 reads thus: “Our chariman of the Trust is affected bycovid pandemic and and he is admitted in AppolloHospital, Chennai for treatment. Now he is inthe Intensive Care Unit and kept under ventilatorhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/support. Hence he is not able to contact by any body. More ever the staff members of theadministrative section in the Trust at the timeof survey in 2015 are not at all in service.Hence the files and other records are nottraceable presently, since the earlier survey hadtaken place nearly 5 years ago. While the Chairman of the trust is undermedical treatment none in the administration ofthe Trust can take any independent decision inthis regard. Neither anybody at present is inthe know of things. Under these circumstances, it is submittedthat the Assistant Commissioner may be pleaded togrant to us time till 30/4/2021 to furnish therequired details called for as we have to contactthe staff who were in charge at that time and wehave to make a search of the same which is likelyto take some more time.” 6.Subsequently, within a few days, ie., on 19.03.2021, theChairman of the Institution died and the certificate to that effecthad also been produced by the petitioner assessee. However, byorders dated 22.03.2021, the respondent revenue has passed orders ofassessment separately in respect of these two assessment years,whereby the tax demand had been made. Therefore, challenging thesaid proceedings dated 22.03.2021 issued by the respondent revenue,in respect of both assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16, these two writpetitions have been filed by the petitioner assessee with theaforesaid prayers. 6.Subsequently, within a few days, ie., on 19.03.2021, theChairman of the Institution died and the certificate to that effecthad also been produced by the petitioner assessee. However, byorders dated 22.03.2021, the respondent revenue has passed orders ofassessment separately in respect of these two assessment years,whereby the tax demand had been made. Therefore, challenging thesaid proceedings dated 22.03.2021 issued by the respondent revenue,in respect of both assessment years 2014-15, 2015-16, these two writpetitions have been filed by the petitioner assessee with theaforesaid prayers. 7.Heard Mr.P.Prithvi Chopda, learned counsel for the petitionerassessee, who having reiterated the aforesaid facts would seekindulgence of this Court that normally these kind of assessmentorders would be challenged before the appellate authority, but herein the case on hand, the fact remains that, on 12.03.2021, finalreminder had been given requiring the petitioner to produce ledgerand files. However, that was not possible, because of the unexpectedsituation, where the Chairman of the Institution was affected withCovid-19 and therefore on 16.03.2021, when he had requested timeupto 30.04.2021, without giving shortest time which was asked for bythe petitioner assessee, these impugned assessment orders had beenpassed on 22.03.2021. In the meanwhile, ie., on 19.03.2021, theChairman of the Institution also expired. Therefore, in suchmitigating circumstances, the plea raised by the petitioner assesseeto the respondent revenue to give time upto 30.04.2021 could havebeen considered and granted and if it had been granted to thepetitioner assessee, it could have been in a position to respond tothe respondent revenue as required by them, for their notice dated12.03.2021 and therefore, for the said reason alone, the petitionerhttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ had chosen to file these writ petitions. Therefore, the learnedcounsel for the petitioner assessee seeks indulgence as against theimpugned orders. 8.Heard Mrs.S.Srimathy, learned Standing counsel for therespondent, who pointed out that, after the inspection was made on27.02.2015, a notice was issued to the petitioner assessee to appearon 09.03.2015 along with the copy of paid challans and details ofpayment and no such documents were filed by the petitioner assessee.Therefore a notice under Section 201(1)(1A) of the Act was issued on30.11.2018 calling for books of accounts, profit and loss account,balance sheet etc. Since, that was also not responded by theassessee, reminders were issued on 08.03.2021, 10.03.2021 andfinally on 12.03.2021. 9.Therefore, 12.03.2021 reminder was the last reminder that wasgiven after giving a long rope to the petitioner assessee nearlyabout 5 years and therefore, it cannot be stated that no opportunitywas given to the petitioner to respond for the last reminder dated12.03.2021. Therefore, the grounds urged by the petitioner forfiling writ petitions against the impugned orders are untenable andtherefore, the writ petitions are liable to be rejected in-limine,the learned standing counsel submitted. 10.I have considered the rival submissions made by learnedcounsel for both parties and have perused the materials placedbefore this Court. 9.Therefore, 12.03.2021 reminder was the last reminder that wasgiven after giving a long rope to the petitioner assessee nearlyabout 5 years and therefore, it cannot be stated that no opportunitywas given to the petitioner to respond for the last reminder dated12.03.2021. Therefore, the grounds urged by the petitioner forfiling writ petitions against the impugned orders are untenable andtherefore, the writ petitions are liable to be rejected in-limine,the learned standing counsel submitted. 10.I have considered the rival submissions made by learnedcounsel for both parties and have perused the materials placedbefore this Court. 11.It is no doubt clear that, the TDS inspection was conductedby the respondent revenue at the business premises of the petitionerassessee on 27.02.2015, following which, a notice was issued on09.03.2015, where he was directed to appear for personal hearingalong with records and challans. Since the same has not beenresponded and no one filed those documents, the respondent revenueissued notice under Section 201(1)(1A) of the Act calling for booksof accounts, etc. Since this was also not responded by the assessee,it triggered the respondent revenue to issue three reminders, ie.,on 08.03.2021, 10.03.2021 and 12.03.2021. After all these remindersonly, according to the respondent revenue, they now passed theorders dated 22.03.2021. Therefore, the plea of the petitioner orthe ground urged by the petitioner assessee that no opportunity wasgiven to the petitioner is completely untenable. 12.However, it is to be noted that it is the stand of therespondent revenue that upto 12,03.2021, the proceedings wascontinued with ofcourse reminders after reminders and communicationhad been sent on behalf of the revenue to the petitioner assessee.Last such communication by way of reminder was sent on 12.03.2021and the copy of the same was extracted hereinabove, where therespondent revenue directed the petitioner assessee to submithttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ details of TDS made along with copies of ledger and challans with e-TDS statement filed for all quarters for the Financial Years 2014-15, 2015-16 on or before 17.03.2021. 13.On receipt of this last communication on behalf of thepetitioner assessee, a short reply has been given with a request bythe petitioner assessee on 16.03.2021 and the contend of the samehas already been extracted hereinabove, where unfortunatecircumstances faced by the head of the Institution had beenexplained by the assessee as he was hospitalized due to Covid-19 andtherefore on that ground, the petitioner assessee sought time upto30.04.2021. Within the short span of time, ie., on 19.03.2021, theChairman of the Institution succumbed to Covid-19. However, on22.03.2021, the impugned orders have been passed by the respondentrevenue. 14.In this context, it is to be taken note of the fact that, ifthe Chairman of the Institution was in dead-bed due to severe attackof Covid-19, definitely the administration of the entire Institutionwould be crippled. At this juncture, it cannot be expected that thelower level sub staff would have acted upon swiftly in response tothe notice issued by the respondent revenue dated 12.03.2021.Despite these factors, on 16.03.2021, an interim reply with requesthad been given by the petitioner assessee explaining the gloomingsituation faced by the institution, because of the health conditionof the head of the Institution and therefore, sought for time upto30.04.2021. 14.In this context, it is to be taken note of the fact that, ifthe Chairman of the Institution was in dead-bed due to severe attackof Covid-19, definitely the administration of the entire Institutionwould be crippled. At this juncture, it cannot be expected that thelower level sub staff would have acted upon swiftly in response tothe notice issued by the respondent revenue dated 12.03.2021.Despite these factors, on 16.03.2021, an interim reply with requesthad been given by the petitioner assessee explaining the gloomingsituation faced by the institution, because of the health conditionof the head of the Institution and therefore, sought for time upto30.04.2021. 15.Though a longer rope has also been taken by the petitioner,as already pointed out by the learned Standing Counsel for therespondent in this matter, after 12.03.2021 last notice, in view ofsuch peculiar situation that has been explained hereinabove, somemore little bit rope could have been extended to the petitionerassessee, which the petitioner wanted only upto 30.04.2021. But therespondent revenue have not chosen to give any time and passedorders on 22.03.2021. 16.In view of these peculiar circumstances, where a finalopportunity reasonably upto 30.04.2021 or any other date that wouldhave been decided by the revenue, might have been given to thepetitioner assessee to respond and still if the petitioner had notdefinitely responded, the respondent revenue might have takenaction, to conclude the proceedings. 17.However, such sympathy has not been shown by the respondentto the petitioner taking into account the peculiar circumstances, ashas been explained above, where the entire Institution would havebeen crippled, because of the unexpected death of the head of theInstitution on 19.03.2021. Hence, this Court feels that it is areasonable cause, where such opportunity sought for by thehttps://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ petitioner assessee could have very well been extended to it andtherefore, for that reason, this Court feels that the impugnedorders can be set aside and remanded to the respondent for re-consideration. 18.In view of the aforesaid reasons, this Court is inclined topass the following order: that the impugned orders in both the writpetitions are quashed and the matters are remandedback to the respondent for re-consideration. Whilemaking such re-consideration, an opportunity torespond as required by the respondent can be givento the petitioner assessee for a period of 30days, within which, the petitioner assessee shallfile the necessary inputs as required by therespondent revenue. If such inputs are filed, thesame can be taken into account and the proceedingscan be concluded. If no such inputs filed by thepetitioner assessee, then it is open to therespondent revenue to proceed further based on theavailable records and final orders can be passed. 19.With these directions, these Writ Petitions are ordered. Nocosts. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions areclosed. Assistant Registrar (CS-II) pnm/smTo Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,TDS Circle, Madurai.CR Building, 2, VP, VP Rathinasamy Nadar Road,Bibikulam, Madurai – 625 002. +1 CC to M/s.S.SRIMATHY, Advocate ( SR-27968[F] dated 02/09/2021 )+2 CC to M/s.PRAMODKUMAR CHOPDA, Advocate ( SR-28174[F],28172 dated06/09/2021 ) W.P.(MD)Nos.8412 & 8633 of 202102.09.2021 SRK(CO)KB(12.11.2021) 6P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/