The brief fact of the case is that the complainant being an account holder of OP bank and made some short term fixed deposits with the OP. He submitted 15G Form in duplicate for non-deduction of TDS amounts from interest incomes against short term deposits lying with the OP on 26.2.15. The petitioner submitted giving option to premature the short-term fixed deposit on 22.2.15 deposited amounting to Rs. 99,000/- only on 29.1.15 along with other three short-term fixed deposits. The premature amount was Rs. 99,475 whereas the petitioner’s savings bank account credited amounting to Rs. 98,770/-. The petitioner already submitted 15 G in duplicate on 26.2.15 for non-deduction of TDS amounts before lodging premature withdrawal of said short-term fixed deposit. The OP did not deduct any TDS amounts from other short-term fixed deposit premature amount. The petitioner wanted to mention all interest income in the short-term fixed deposit matured previously as well as current short-term fixed deposit in the 15G Form in the same financial year. But the OP instructed that the fixed deposit which were already matured could not be lodged the 15 G Form again. The OP deducted all the TDS amounting to Rs. 891/- against interests of short term fixed deposit which were matured previously from the amount of said current premature short-term fixed deposit. The petitioner applied to refund TDS amounts which were deducted against the interest of the short-term fixed deposit which were matured previously from the said current premature short-term fixed deposited amount on 27.02.2015 to the OP. But the OP failed to refund the TDS amount till date. The petitioner explained the OP that the previous interest of the matured short term fixed deposit should never be entitled for deduction of TDS amount from the interest of current short term fixed deposit. The TDS amount should be entitled for deduction from that particular deposit account only. The petitioner also submitted 15 G form for declaration of non deduction of TDS. The OP failed to pursued this petitioner’s application for refund of TDS amount surprisingly the OP has shamelessly and deliberately tried to avoid the petitioner continuously. The OP fails to issue TDS certificate in Form 16A of Income Tax Act, 1961 to the petitioner till now which is also a deficiency of service. So this petitioner filed the complaint case against the OP before this Forum to get relief against the deficiency of service made by the OP. He prayed for a direction upon the OP to refund the TDS amounting to Rs. 891/- which was wrongly deducted by the OP from the petitioner’s premature short term account, compensation of Rs. 10,000/- for mental agony and harassment and litigation expenses amounting to Rs. 5,000/-.
Opposite Party appeared and filed written version denying the allegation leveled against him. he averred that he told the petitioner that TDS certificate will be issued to him by which the OP will claim the refund of TDS from the Income Tax Department. Inspite of that petitioner was not convinced. But unnecessarily wanted to get further reply from the OP. He assailed that the OP advised the petitioner that TDS certificate will be issued to the petitioner by the Bank so that petitioner could claim refund from the Income Tax Department. Reliefs sort for in the complaint petition is not valid, legal and justified. As because there is no question of mental agony as well as harassment for deficiency of services caused by the OP. So, the petition deserved to be dismissed.
Complainant files affidavit in chief which is the replica of complaint petition.
OP filed affidavit in chief in which he stated that petitioner was advised that TDS amount was already deposited to the Government account through the system that is why the OP could not refund the same and TDS certificate will be issued by OP and the petitioner will claim refund of TDS amount from Income Tax Department.
Both sides file written notes of argument which are taken into consideration for passing Final Order.
Under the pleadings of the both parties following issues are made.
- Whether the complainant Sanat Kumar De is a Consumer of the OP under the Consumer Protection Act,1986?
- Whether this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case?
- Whether there is any deficiency of service on the part of the opposite party?
- Whether the complainant is entitled to get relief as prayed for?
Decision with reasons:
Issue No.1
From the materials on record it is transparent that the Complainant is a “Consumer” of the opposite party as provided by the spirit of section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Consumer Protection Act,1986. As the complainant being a customer of the OP bank is maintaining a savings account apart from other fixed deposit accounts before the OP bank, so he is entitled to get service from the service provider i.e. OP bank.
Issue No.2
Both the complainant and opposite party are residents/carrying on business within the district of Hooghly. The complaint valued within Rs.20,00,000/- limit of this Forum. So, this Forum has territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain and try the case.
Issue No.3
The complainant is an account holder of Indian Overseas Bank, Chinsurah Branch and he submitted the 15G Form in duplicate for non deduction of TDS amounts from the interests against short term deposits lying with the opposite party on 26.02.2015. The petitioner opted to premature the short term fixed deposit of Rs. 99000/- along with other three fixed deposits on 26.02.2015 with the OP. He already submitted 15G Form in duplicate on 26.02.2015 for non deduction of TDS before lodging premature withdrawal of the said short term deposit to the OP. The OP did not deduct any current TDS amount from the premature amount. The OP deducted all the TDS amounts of Rs. 891/- which were already matured previously from the current accounts. The OP did not deduct any TDS from the current interest of the fixed deposit amount. Dispute cropped up when the OP deducted the TDS amounts of Rs. 891/- for the fixed deposit amounts which were matured previously from one of the fixed deposits amount of Rs. 99475/- which was matured currently. The OP advised him not to mention previous interest which were already matured when lodging 15G Form currently but the OP without any reason deducted the TDS amounts of previous interest from current matured amounts. Complainant applied to refund the TDS amount which was deducted by the OP twice but OP failed to refund the TDS amount to the complainant. Petitioner showed the reference of other bank but OP failed to issue TDS certificate in Form 16A of I.T. Act, 1961 to him. The boon of contention of this complaint petition is that the OP deducted the TDS amounts of previous interest deducted from the current interest establishment by the OP which is very much inappropriate and unreasonable and failing to refund the TDS amount to this complainant tantamount to deficiency of service on the part of the OP for which the complainant being aggrieved filed this complaint.
The answering OP replied that they have deducted the TDS amounts as per norms of the bank in accordance with the prevailing system and advised the petitioner to refund the TDS by filing return before the Income department after obtaining the TDS certificate from the OP. As TDS amount has already been deposited to the government Account, the opposite party unable to refund it from their side. So there is no question of mental pain & agony of the complainant.
It appears from the certificate of the OP issued to this complainant that the OP paid a sum of Rs.11350/- as interest to this complainant from the period from 13.08.2014 to 31.01.2015 in different investments and the OP deducted a sum of Rs.891/- as TDS from the complainant and the OP deposited those TDS amounts in the income department through challans on different dates on 06.01.2015 & 06.03.2015. The OP produced Form 16A in respect of the deductee namely Sanat Kumar De i.e. the complainant herein to substantiate his claim that he immediately after deducting the TDS send the same before the income tax authority. The complainant did not assail that the OP could not deposit the TDS before the Income department by producing the 26AS in respect of PAN of the complainant. So we may safely conclude that the OP after deducting the TDS of the complainant deposited before the income department in accordance with the procedure mentioned by the banks and advised the complainant to refund the same by filing return before the Income department. But the complainant apart from doing so demanded refund from the OP bank which is quiet impossible for a bank as immediately after deducting the amount as tax from this complainant send the same before the income tax department in accordance with the law. So there is no question of deficiency of service on the part of the OP.
Issue No.4:
The discussion made herein before, we have no hesitation to come in a conclusion that the Complainant has failed to prove his case and the Opposite Party is not liable to pay any cost & compensation.
ORDER
Hence, it is ordered that the compliant case No.56/2016 be the same is dismissed on contest against the Opposite party.
Let a plain copy of this order be supplied free of cost to the parties/their Ld. Advocates/Agents on record by hand under proper acknowledgement/ sent by ordinary post for information & necessary action.
