Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Executive Engineer (O & M) TANGEDCO, Versus The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

2015 (6) TMI 894 - ITAT CHENNAI

Penalty u/s. 272A (2)(k) - not filing the TDS returns in time for all the four quarters of F.Y. 2010-11 - Held that:- In the present case the assessee had deducted TDS from the payment and paid it to the Government treasury. The assessee was required to file return as per section 200(3) of the Act which the assessee failed to do. This had attracted levy of penalty u/s.272A(2)(k) of the Act. The assessee has explained the reason for failure to file return of TDS as required, that the work was han .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

justifying the levy of penalty in this case. The explanation offered by the assessee is bonafide and the default is only technical in nature. We are inclined to delete the penalty for the above assessment years. - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. No.515 & 516 /Mds/2015 - Dated:- 13-4-2015 - Shri Chandra Poojari And Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad JJ. For the Appellant : Shri. S. Sridhar, Advocate For the Respondent : Dr. Nischal, IRS, JCIT. ORDER Per Chandra Poojari, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER These .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

administrative reasons as well as the frequent changes in the office of the assessee, the decision to file the appeals was taken belatedly in as much as the frequent changes in the office were not anticipated and the said reason would constitute reasonable cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeals under consideration. The assessee s counsel placed reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 wherein it is held that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

principle. Everyday delay must be explained does not imply a pedantic approach. The doctrine must be applied in a rational, common sense and pragmatic manner. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have a vested right in injustice being done because of non-deliberate delay. 3. The ld. Departmental Representative has not raised any serious objection to condo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hese two appeals are condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication. 5. Coming to the facts of the case for the assessment year 2010-2011 that the assessee is required to file e-TDS returns as per the provisions of sec.200(3) of the Act. The relevant details for the A.Y. 2010-11 are as under:- Period Due date for filing the return Date of reckoning Delay in No. of days Penalty leviable @100/day First Quarter 15.07.2010 30.03.2012 989 98,900 Second Quarter 15.10.2010 30.03.2012 897 89,700 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ince assessee violated the statutory provisions of section 200(3) of the Act by not filing the TDS returns in time for all the four quarters of F.Y. 2010-11, the JCIT, TDS Range-I, Chennai levied a penalty of I3,37,600/- for the F.Y. 2009-10. 5.1 The relevant particulars relating to the assessment year 2008- 2009 is as under:- Period Due date for filing the return Date of reckoning Delay in No. of days Penalty leviable @100/day First Quarter 15.07.2010 30.03.2012 1720 1,72,000 Second Quarter 15. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

view that the assessee has willfully not complied with the notice issued. Since the assessee violated the statutory provisions of sec. 200(3) of the Act by not filing the TDS returns in time for the all the quarters of F.Y 2007-08, the JCIT levied a penalty of I6,29,900/- u/s.272A (2) (k) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee went in appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 6. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) observed that it is a fact t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Filing of returns as per sec.200(3) of the Act is a statutory function of the deductor and failure to do so necessarily invites levy of penalty u/s.272A(2)(k) of the Act. Hence, it is a fit case for levy of penalty u/s.272A(2) (k) of the Act for both the assessment years viz 2008-09 and 2010-11. The assessee was not able to prove the reasonable cause for failure to file the returns in time for both the assessment years. Sufficient opportunities were offered to the assessee for explaining the re .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version