TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tement being merely a technical default no penalty is warranted. Decided in favour of assessee. Thus, the order of CIT(A) is not justified and grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. - Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Accountant Member And Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Kapil Hirani For the Revenue : Shri Amol Khairnar ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 09-05-2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Nagpur [ CIT(A) ] for assessment year 2009-10. 2. The assessee raised three grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in confirming t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such conclusion the Co-ordinate Bench relied on many decisions of Hon ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana and Allahabad. The relevant portion at para 24 to 28 is reproduced here-in-below for ready reference : 24. The Hon'ble Punjab Haryana High Court in HMT Ltd. v. CIT [2005] 274 ITR 544/[2004] 140 Taxman 606 had held that where the tax deducted at source had been paid in time and the necessary returns in respect thereto were filed in time with the Income Tax Department, on mere late issue of tax deduction certificate, there was no loss to the Revenue and the delay in furnishing the tax deduction certificate was held to be merely technical or venial in nature and penalty levied under section 272A(2)(k) of the Act was deleted. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation before the Assessing Officer for the said default and only on the last date, it was pointed out that since the Principal of college had joined recently, it would take some time to collect the records for filing the e-TDS statements. The assessee however, failed to comply with notice and the Assessing Officer held the assessee to be liable for levy of penalty under section 272A(2)(k) of the Act. Before the CIT(A), the assessee for the first time offered an explanation that prior to joining regular Principal in the college on 25.01.2010, only officiating Principal had been working, who did not have idea of e-TDS statements and requirement of filing the same. The Tribunal noted that the appellate authority had accepted the explanation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eviable. The Hon'ble High Court in an appeal filed by the assessee dismissed the plea of assessee that no penalty is leviable but has upheld the orders of authorities below, wherein the CIT(A) had restricted the levy of penalty from the date of 1st April, 2010 in respect of e-TDS statements to be filed for assessment years 2008-09 to 2012-13, since the assessee had explained that regular Principal had assumed charge on 25.01.2010. In other words, the Hon'ble High Court has accepted the explanation offered by the assessee regarding reasonableness of cause of delay in furnishing e-TDS returns late partially. Admittedly, the default in filing the said e-TDS returns have not been accepted in full but taking into consideration the reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icate the issue before us, we accept the case of reasonable cause as relevant to section 273B of the Act put up by the assessee in the respective cases in the appeals before us, which admittedly relate to different quarters of assessment year 2011-12. Where for the first time, there was requirement of e-TDS furnishing of TDS statement and since there were certain complications in e-filing of TDS returns because of system failure, which admittedly, was amended 18 times by the Department, the delay in furnishing the said returns late could not be attributed to the assessee. The onus was upon the authorities to provide platform for easy compliance to newly introduced provisions of the Act. Where such facilities could not be provided by the aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
