2025 (3) TMI 43

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of the penalty orders dated 08.09.2022passed under sections 271(1)(c) and 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively[hereinafter referred to as 'the Act']. 2. At the outset, it was prayed by the learned counsel appearing for the Revenue that the appeal is delayed by 23 days. The Revenue has filed a petition for the condonation of the delay and finding reasons as sufficient for delay for filing appeal, the delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has made payment for External Development Charges(EDC) to Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA). The assessee has not deducted TDS on EDC charges paid by the assessee to HUDA. The AO in the assessment order initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ection 194 for exemption of TDS from payment of EDC charges. It was further submitted by the Learned AR that though the Hon'ble Delhi High Court has decided the issue in favour of the Revenue, the matter is sub-judice before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 7. The Learned AR further placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petroproducts P Ltd. reported in(2010) 322 ITR 158(SC). Learned AR also placed reliance on the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court's decision in the case of Nayan C Shah Vs ITO reported in (2016) 69 Taxmann.com 256(Guj). 8. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the material available on the record. We find that the learned CIT(A) vide his order dated 07.03.202 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n such a factual matrix, we are of the considered view that mere noncompliance with the TDS provisions do not imply concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars to encompass the assessee with the mischief of section 271(1)(c)/270A.We are of the considered view that by making an incorrect claim in law, would not tantamount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars. In such a scenario, following the ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Reliance Petroproducts (supra),we hold that the learned CIT(A) has correctly deleted the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act for AY 2016- 17.Ground no 1 of the Revenue is dismissed. 11. Similar is the position in ITA No.2770/Del/2024 where facts and circumstances are identical and the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X