9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (9) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty of Rs. 2,41,100 under section 272A(2)(g) of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 1993-94. 2. The Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings under section 272A(2)(g) of the Act on the ground of delay in issuing TDS certificates. He worked out delay of 2411 days in the issue of 8 TDS certificates vide details in the impugned orders. In reply to the show cause, it was submitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on period only one default should be taken. Further, excluding the common period the default is of 425 days. All defaults are in this period and defaults from 7th April, 1993 to 3rd December, 1993 could not be for financial year 1992-93. The AR also contended that penalty could not be levied for non furnishing of certificates when there was only delay in issue of certi-ficates. 5. Further, the De ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de reasons because the assessee was not aware of the law and the concerned persons did not approach the assessee for issue of the certificates in time. They wanted certificate at the end of the financial year to avoid loss of the same. He stated that tax at source had been deducted and deposited in the Government Account as per law and there was also no loss of revenue. There was also no loss or h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rted the orders of the Assessing Officer and the ld. CIT(A). 8. After considering the rival submissions and the materials on the file I am of the view that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the ITAT decisions in similar other cases, the assessee deserves to succeed in his appeal. The assessee had deducted TDS and deposited in the Government Account as per law. He al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present case. Moreover, the present case is fully covered by the ITAT, Delhi Bench "C", New Delhi order dated 15-7-1998 in the case of M/s. Guru Nanak Construction (P.) Ltd. in ITA No. 3019/Del/97 for the assessment year 1992-93. 9. In the above view of the matter, I hold that there were bona fide reasons for the delay and penalty under section 272A(2)(g) was not exigible in the case. Accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
