CHHOGMAL CHIRANJI LAL Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present batch of petitions involve identical questions of law and facts. In this background, they are decided by a common judgment. For the factual matrix, details of the case of Chhogmal Chiranji Lal v. Commissioner of Income-tax, are taken into consideration.

(2.) IN this case, the petitioner has challenged the action of the respondents in issuing the orders annexure 3 and annexure 5. The orders impugned have been passed against the petitioner in the background that there were certain deposits with the petitioner and he was required to deduct income-tax on the payment "of interest on such deposits. Section 201(1) of the INcome-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), provides that as and when such tax is paid on deposits, tax is required to be deducted at source. Such deduction is waived where the recipient of interest, even after receiving the interest does not become a person, who is liable to pay tax and furnishes a Form No. 15H.

(3.) THE petitioner's further case is that the petitioner has received the form on April 1, 1999, and thus, it should be deemed that the requirement of law has been complied with because he could submit it to the Department up to April 7, 1999. THE petitioner had received the form before he was required to submit the same to the authorities. THE petitioner has further submitted that the Income-tax Officer (TDS) who had issued notice annexure 2 had no jurisdiction to assess and pass an order annexure 3 because under Section 197 of the Act, it is the Commissioner or Joint Commissioner who are the officers to whom the matter is to be referred and, therefore, the notice is bad for want of jurisdiction also.