TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat the assessee being responsible person was required to deduct tax under s. 194A of the IT Act, 1961, at the prescribed rate of interest paid/credited, exceeding Rs. 2,500 during the financial year under consideration. However, it did not deduct tax since the persons to whom interest was paid/credited made declarations under s. 197A(1A) in Form No. 15H. According to him, one copy of each declaration was due to be delivered in the office of the CIT by the 7th day of the month next following the month in which the declaration was furnished to the assessee-firm. The learned CIT pointed out the delay in furnishing the Form No. 15H as per following details: S. No. Name of declarant Date on which declaration furnishe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see. He further submitted that the loans were temporary loans and as on 30th Sept., 1997, the assessee was not in a position to know as to whether the depositor will continue with the deposit and the interest would exceed Rs. 2,500 at the year—end, i.e., 31st March, 1998. It was also submitted that in respect of all other credits wherein the interest exceeded Rs. 2,500, Form No. 15H had been furnished on the due date. Reliance was placed on the following cases: (i) ITA No. 361/Chd/2001, The Manager, Union Bank of India, Khanna vs. CIT (ii) ITA No. 193/Chd/2001, The Manager, Allahabad Bank, Ludhiana vs. CIT (iii) ITA No. 830/Chd/1996, The Manager, Allahabad Bank, Ludhiana vs. CIT (iv) ITA No. 745/Chd/2000, The Manager, Indian Ove ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee filed Form No. 15H on the due date. That contention of the learned counsel for the assessee had not been rebutted by the learned Departmental Representative. Considering the totality of the facts as narrated hereinabove, we are of the view that the default committed by the assessee was only a technical default and the assessee was having a bona fide belief that Form No. 15H was to be submitted only when the amount of interest credited exceeds Rs. 2,500. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) observed as under: "Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
