There is no provision of law to deduct TDS on the interest amount received against NSC and Saving Account

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
CUTTACK ‘SMC’ BENCH, CUTTACK
BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER

ITA No.144/CTK/2020
Assessment Year : 2012-2013

Sri Birendra Kumar Mohanty,
Ganapatipur, Kodandapur,
Jajpur
PAN/GIR No.A
(Appellant

Vs. 

ACIT, Circle -1(1),
Cuttack
AEQPM 9529N
(Appellant) .. ( Respondent

Assessee by : Shri S.N.Sahu, AR
Revenue by : Shri S.C.Mohanty, DR

Date of Hearing : 28/05/ 2021
Date of Pronouncement : 14/06/20

 O R D E R

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the or CIT(A), Cuttack dated 3.12.2019 for the assessment year 2012 The concise ground of appeal is as under:

“1. That the ld CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the addition of Rs.9,14,534/- made by the AO even after explaining that the interest received from fixed deposits from the banks shown in the hands of the firm M/s. Biraja Construction wherein the assessee is a partner. Income received on fixed deposit pledged with the contractee of the firm M/s. Biraja Construction as the said amount is the income of the firm duly reflected in the audited accounts.

2. That the said interest income of Rs.9,14,634/-has been offered for taxation in the hands of the firm together with other interest income of the firm totaling to Rs.19,41,723/- which could be verified from the profit and loss account and income tax return of the firm for the assessment year 2012-13 and this method of accountancy is adopted consistently year after year accepted by the revenue.”
 
3. The assessee has filed appeal belatedly by 61 days. The assessee has filed condonation petition dated 24.7.2020 contending that due to spread of COVID 19 pandemic and consequent declaration of shut down/lockdown during the month of April and May, 2020, the appeal could not be filed in time; therefore, there was delay of 61 days in filing the appeal. In the petition, it is stated that the delay was not intentional and, therefore, same should be condoned. The ld DR opposed to the condonation of delay prayer. After considering the condonation petition and hearing the parties, I am convinced that the delay in filing by the assessee was not intentional and, therefore, the prayer of the assessee for condoning the delay was accepted. I, therefore, condone the delay of 61 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 

To know more in details find the attachment file