TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rected the assessee to furnish details. As the details were not furnished by the assessee, the Assessing Officer has issued a penalty notice under section 272A(2)(c). The said Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal on the ground that it was belatedly filed. Aggrieved by that order, the assessee has filed an appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, and the remanded the same to the Assessing Officer directing him to verify and levy the penalty after verification. Against that order, the present appeal is filed. Held that- there were no details regarding the mode of computation of the number of days delay by the Assessing Officer. So the Tribunal was of the view that it was not clear from the order of the author ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income-tax (Appeals)?" 2. The brief facts are as follows: 3. The relevant assessment year is 1995-96. The corresponding accounting year ended on March 31, 1995. The assessee is a tax deductor under section 194C of the Income-tax Act. It was noticed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee did not file its annual return in Form No. 26C regarding tax deducted at source out of contract payments made during the financial year. The assessee had disbursed considerable amounts during the above period by way of contract payments to the contractors. However, in the absence of annual return, details of tax deducted at source out of the contract payments and the remittance could not be ascertained. So, the Assessing Officer directed the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r with a direction to redo the same. It is therefore submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law and the same should be set aside. 5. Heard the counsel. The annual return in Form 26C for the year ending ought to have been filed on or before June 31, 1995. But the assessee has not filed the return in time and hence, there is a delay in filing the same. The Assessing Officer was of the view that there is a delay of 878 days in filing the return. But, there are no details regarding the mode of computation of the number of days delay by the Assessing Officer. So the Tribunal was of the view that it is not clear from the order of the authorities below as to the exact number of days delay. Hence, the Tribunal s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
