Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2007 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2007 (10) TMI 547 - AT - Income TaxPenalty levied u/s 272B - Mistake in quoting correct PAN of the deductee in the TDS returns - banking business - default in complying with the provisions of section 139A of the Act read with rules 114B to 114D - HELD THAT:- In view of interpretation of the provisions of sections 139A(5), 139A(6), 272B(1) and of 272B(2) of the Act, and rules 114B to 114D we are of the opinion that penalty for failure to comply with the provisions of section 139A of the Act can be imposed only on the customer and not on the bank, except when the bank is found to (sic). Levy of penalty for failure to comply with Rules is concerned, We are of the opinion that there is no provision, i.e., section 272B of the Act does not prescribe levy of any penalty for such failure and secondly, we are of the opinion that even if it is assumed that there is any penalty for such failure, then in our opinion, there being no failure on the part of the assessee to comply with the provisions of rules 114B to 114D, the assessee was not liable to any penalty. In the result, we, first of all, direct the Assessing Officer to see if enhancement made by the CIT(A) has resulted in double levy of penalty of section 209 accounts and if it is so, then penalty to that extent should be reduced straightaway. We cancel the penalty in question. Without prejudice to the aforesaid conclusion, even if it is assumed that it was the assessee’s obligation to procure duly filled in Form No. 60 and supporting evidence thereof and the penalty u/s 272B is leviable for such failure of the assessee, then also we are of the opinion that the assessee having procured Form No. 60, though defective one, it should have been allowed an opportunity to make good that of efficiency, but was not a fit case for levying of any penalty u/s 272B of the Act. So far as the assessee’s plea that the penalty, if at all, was leviable, could be levied only with respect to 237 accounts is concerned, we, having cancelled the penalty as a whole, are of the opinion that this ground requires no independent adjudication. The assessee’s another plea that penalty, if any, leviable could be only for default as a whole ; i.e., only to the extent of Rs. 10,000 and not on the basis of default for each account, i.e., penalty could be levied only to the extent of Rs. 10,000, we are, again, of the opinion that we having cancelled the whole, this issue requires no independent adjudication. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
|