Sri Shyamal Gupta, Member

Aggrieved with the Order dated 10-11-2017, by which the complaint case bearing no. 363/2015 being filed by the Appellant was dismissed by the Ld. District Forum, Kolkata – I (North), this Appeal is moved by Sri Nil Kamal Basak.

The dispute revolves around deduction of tax from the interest earned by the Appellant in respect of some Recurring Deposits during the financial year 2011-2012 (assessment year 2012-2013).

It appears from the Postal AD Card that notice was duly served upon the Respondent.  Despite this, as the Respondent did not turn up at all to defend its case before this Commission, the Appeal was heard ex parte.

It appears from the documents on record that during the financial year 2011-2012, the Respondent deducted total sum of Rs. 24,813/- from the interest income of the Appellant in respect of four Recurring Deposits.  Such deduction itself is highly questionable given that earlier though it was fully taxable, the interest from Recurring Deposits was exempt from TDS.

It is also noticed from the statement of TDS prepared by the Appellant that, while in respect of one RD account, the Respondent deducted tax @ 20%, in respect of other 3 accounts, it deducted tax @ 10%.  Why this discrepancy, remains baffling.

Furthermore, though the Respondent was duty bound to issue TDS Certificate in Form 16A in respect of any payment other than salaries, on quarterly basis, within 15 days from the due date for furnishing the statement of TDS for the relevant quarter, it seems, no such certificate was issued to the Appellant in time.  Significantly, the Income Tax Act, 1961 mandates that in case the payer fails to issue TDS certificate, he shall be liable to penalty u/s 272A(2)(g) of Rs. 100/- for each day of default.

Notwithstanding the Respondent blamed the Appellant for submission of wrong Form, it is not understood, why the Respondent did not ask the Appellant to submit declaration in proper form instead of casually accepting it from him.  As a layman, the Appellant might be prone to inadvertent mistake.  However, as the concerned official of the Respondent Bank was well versed in this regard, there was no reason for him to overlook this aspect.

Finally, it is indeed surprising that although it was mandatory on the part of the Respondent to suo motu issue Form 16A within one month from the date of payment of tax, in respect of the Appellant, such Certificate was issued on 18-05-2015, i.e., 3 years later (approx.).  As the time limit for claiming refund was one year from the last day of the assessment year, due to belated issuance of TDS Certificate, the Appellant could not file revised return to get back the TDS amount from the Income Tax Department and Annexure-13 bears testimony of such fact. 

Thus, we find that on account of sheer negligence of the Respondent, the Appellant suffered monetary loss. The Respondent being deficient in rendering service to the Appellant, it cannot abdicate its liability to make good the financial loss of the Appellant.

Accordingly, we direct the Respondent to pay Rs. 24,813/- to the Appellant within 40 days hence along with simple interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the complaint case till full and final payment is made.  Besides, we also hold the Respondent liable to pay litigation cost to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- to the Appellant.

The Appeal, accordingly, stands allowed in part.  The impugned order is hereby set aside.