2007 (9) TMI 18 - HC - Income Tax

Revenue contended that whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in dismissing the appeal of the revenue and upholding the deletion by the CIT(A) of the penalty imposed u/s 271D of the ITA,1961- Held that tribunal was correct

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding penalty under Section 271D of Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Assessment of deliberate defiance of provisions under Section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Issue 1:
The revenue filed an appeal challenging the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) regarding the deletion of penalty under Section 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the default in question was a technical nature where creditors mistakenly deposited drafts in the account of the Excise and Taxation Department instead of the assessee's account. The Tribunal considered this a technical default and not a deliberate violation of Section 269SS of the Act. Citing the judgment of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa, the Tribunal held that there was no deliberate defiance of the provisions. The High Court, after reviewing the orders of the Assessing Officer, CIT (A), and the Tribunal, concluded that no question of law necessitating admission of the appeal existed. Therefore, the appeal was dismissed.

Issue 2:
The second issue pertained to whether the assessee deliberately defied the provisions of Section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961 or acted in conscious disregard of its obligations. The Tribunal found that the error made by the assessee was a technical default and not a deliberate act of defiance. The Tribunal, in line with the judgment of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa, concluded that the penalty under Section 271D was rightly deleted by the CIT (A). The High Court concurred with the Tribunal's findings and held that the assessee did not act deliberately in defiance of the provisions of the Act. The appeal was dismissed based on the lack of merit in challenging the Tribunal's decision.

This comprehensive analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues raised by the revenue in challenging the Tribunal's decision regarding penalties under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The judgment emphasizes the distinction between technical defaults and deliberate violations of tax provisions, drawing on legal precedents to support the findings.