Tripura

West Tripura

CC/37/2015

Smt. Anindita Nath. - Complainant(s)

Versus

The Branch Manager, Tripura Gramin Bank & 2 others. - Opp.Party(s)

Self

13 Jan 2016

ORDER

DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSSAL FORUM
WEST TRIPURA : AGARTALA

    CASE NO:  CC-  37 of 2015

Anindita Nath,
W/O- Sri Goutam Debnath,
Kalikapur, P.O.- Border Rampur, 
Agartala, Tripura West.        ............Complainant.
    
         ______VERSUS______

1. The Branch Manager,
Tripura Gramin Bank,
Durga Chowmuhani Branch,
Agartala, West Tripura.

2. The General Manager, Head Office,
Tripura Gramin Bank,
Abhoynagar, Agartala, 
West Tripura.

3. The Chairman, Head Office,
Tripura Gramin Bank,
Abhoynagar, Agartala,
West Tripura District.        .........Opposite Parties.
            

                    __________PRESENT__________

 SRI A. PAL,
PRESIDENT,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM,
      WEST TRIPURA, AGARTALA. 

SMT. Dr. G. DEBNATH
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

SHR. B. BHATTACHARYA,
MEMBER,
  DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

C O U N S E L

For the Complainant        : Complainant in person.    

For the Opposite parties        : Sri K. Bhattacharjee,
                       Advocate.              
                                                         

JUDGMENT  DELIVERED  ON:  13.01.16

J U D G M E N T

        This case U/S 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, arises on the complaint filed by Anindita Nath. She filed the case against the Branch Manager, Tripura Gramin Bank, Durga Chowmuhani Branch alleging that the Branch Manager, Gramin Bank, Durga Chowmuhani Branch deducted  Rs.5,173/- from the interest earned by depositing fixed deposit certificate. The Gramin Bank Manager, Opposite party deducted Rs.5173/- violating the agreement and did not issue any TDS certificate to support that it was deducted from the source as a income tax. It is alleged that as the complainant could not file the TDS so she had to pay penalty. Various written communication was written by her with the source bank but no step taken by the O.P. bank authority. Petitioner therefore, prayed for compensation of Rs.78,500/- for non-issuance of TDS Certificate,  5 lakhs for mental agony, 14 lakhs for study loss. Thus, she claimed Rs.19,78,500/- as compensation.

2.        Opposite party, the Branch Manager, Tripura Gramin Bank, Durga Chowmuhani Branch appeared and filed written statement denying the claim. It is contended that the bank has already displayed the Provisions relating to submission of Form No. 15G/15H in a prominent place of the Bank Branch as well as their notice board. Petitioner failed to submit the 15G/15H format as per advice of the bank. That the income tax on interest was deducted as per law and there was no deficiency of service by the bank.

3.        On the basis of rival contention  as put forward by the parties following points  cropped up for determination;
        (i) Whether the O.P. Manager, Gramin Bank, Durga Chowmuhani Branch deducted Rs.5173/- from the maturity value without proper assessment of income and has deficiency of service?
        (ii) Whether the petitioner is entitled to get compensation as claimed?

4.        Petitioner produced the original letter of instruction, prayer for refund of deducted amount, PAN Card, 15G  submission, original receipt from Head Office, Original letter issued by Branch Manager, Prayer for refunding the amount, original letter for receipt return, claim and declaration  16A format issuance date, fees of Rs.1500/- demanded by RKD & Associates, certificate of RIP 3372. Those are exhibited and marked Exhibit 1 Series.
        Petitioner also examined one witness i.e., the complainant herself.

5.        Opposite party on the other hand produced the letter written to the complainant as Exhibit A. Exhibit B is the resolution by Branch Manager TGB, Durga Chowmuhani Branch. Also examined one witness i.e., Gramin Bank Manager, Biswadeb Datta Choudhury. 
6.        On the basis of evidence on the record we shall now determine the above points. 
FINDINGS:

7.        It is admitted fact that the petitioner Anindita Nath deposited 1 lakh vide certificate A/C No- 3372 effective from 14.05.09 for one year. It was renewed again and again and finally it was to be matured on 28.04.15. From careful scrutiny of the certificate it is found that no income tax deducted for the first 12 months income. Then Rs.1,08,775/- was deposited for a term of 24 months, rate of interest 7%. Maturity value Rs.1,24,970/-. Maturity value is subject to taxation law. It is alleged that tax on interest at the source was deducted by Tripura Gramin Bank on 25.01.13 and on 25.04.11 without any intimation. From the certificate it is found that the matured value is Rs.1,24,000/- then again the certificate was opened for Rs.1,13,458/- in 2011 instead of matured date on 14.05.12. Maturity date then was  on 25.04.14. Maturity value of Rs.1,49,272/-. It was again deposited but showing it Rs.1,44,099/-for 12 months and maturity shows on 25.04.15 is Rs.1,57,512/-. Rs.5173/- was deducted as tax from the interest earning. It was done without any intimation. Several correspondence are made by the petitioner with the manager TGB. It is also informed that petitioner was under lower income Group. She also informed her PAN Card Number. One circular is given by the Gramin Bank authority to all branches. In that circular it is mentioned that it is mandatory  for the bank to deduct the tax at the source on payment made by the bank and deposit the same in the Govt. account. Section 194A deals with the deduction of tax at the source from interest. But thereafter it is written that tax is not deductable under section 194A if the amount of interest or  aggregated such interest credited or paid or likely to be credited or paid during the financial year does not exceed Rs.10 ,000/-. So, when the interest earning is below Rs.10,000/- then tax should not be deducted as per the circular. Interest earning up to Rs.10,000/- is exempted as per Income Tax Act. Here in this case Opposite party Branch Manager did not take into account this fact. He is to calculate the earning in one financial year. But he calculated total interest of earning in 3 years. And in the written statement it is stated that on total interest earning  tax was deducted. According to the complainant she submitted 15G along with PAN Card on 09.05.14 before the maturity. As per agreement/ bank circular rate of TDS is 10% where the recipient furnished PAN Card. In this case the petitioner furnished Pan copy also 15 G form in late.  How the opposite party  calculated the total tax not clearly stated in the written statement or in the evidence. In the written statement only it is stated that the submission of 15G/ 15H was necessary but the complainant failed to do so.

8.        Even if the customer fails to submit 15G/ 15H the Branch Manager, Gramin Bank has no right  to deduct  the tax only as per law and the amount prescribed by law which is 10% only. In this case Rs.1,13,458/- was deposited on 25.04.11 and matured value was Rs.1,49,272/-. So, interest earning in 3 years was about Rs.36,000/-. If 10% is deducted then amount stands as Rs.36,00/- but Rs.5,173/- was deducted which was improper and not according to direction given. Originally 1 lakh was deposited and then Rs.1,08,775/-. Sometimes interest earning was below Rs.10,000/- and tax not deductable. After furnishing 15G the bank authority was under liability to review the matter and refund the TDS wrongly deducted but that was not done. Deduction should be justified and it is to be proved by the Gramin Bank authority that the tax was deductable but it was not done. There was total deficiency of service by the Manager, Gramin Bank, Durga Chowmuhani Branch. He only promised to give Form 16 but did not supply TDS. It is informed that tax deducted by machine. He was maintaining machines. Machines was not under his control. He has  not given this  information letter to the petitioner. This again is a deficiency of service to the customer. Therefore, we hold that the opposite party, Manager, Gramin Bank did not act properly. The contention of the petitioner that she had paid penalty of Rs.78,500/- is not supported by any evidence. Why she had paid Rs.78,500/- to the income tax department as penalty not clarified. The payment receipt also not produced. So, we can not rely on this statement that she paid Rs.78.500/- as penalty for non-submission of TDS in respect of interest earning for fixed deposit of  Rs. 1,13000.

9.        Considering the facts and circumstances as placed before us we are of the considered opinion that petitioner suffered for deduction of higher amount from her interest earning and there was deficiency of service by the O.P. Manager, Gramin Bank. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get back the amount deducted of Rs.5,173/- deducted from interest earning and she is also entitled to get compensation amounting to Rs.20,000/- as she has suffered a lot for the deficiency of service by the Opposite party, Manager, Gramin Bank. 

10.        We therefore, direct the O.P. No.1 Branch Manager Tripura Gramin Bank, Durga Chomuhani Branch to refund Rs.5,173/- to the petitioner along with compensation amount of Rs.20,000/- for their deficiency of service. Both the points are decided accordingly. 

11.        As per our decision on the above points we direct the O.P. Tripura Gramin Bank to pay Rs.20,000/-(rupees twenty thousand) as compensation to the petitioner and also refund Rs.5,173/- total Rs.25,173/- to the petitioner and to pay the same within 2(two) months. If it is not paid within 2(two) months it will carry interest @9% P.A. Supply copy of the judgment to the petitioner and the O.Ps free of cost.   

12.                  A N N O U N C E D

 

SRI A. PAL
PRESIDENT,
DISTRICT CONSUMER  DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM,
WEST TRIPURA,  AGARTALA.

 

 
SMT. DR. G. DEBNATH
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  AGARTALA, WEST TRIPURA.    SHRI. B. BHATTACHARYA,
MEMBER,
 DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES 
REDRESSAL FORUM, 
  AGARTALA, WEST TRIPURA.