2017 (5) TMI 1672 - HC - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271CA - non-collection of tax at source (TCS) u/s 206C - Whether assessee has committed default to collect the tax at source as required the provisions of Section 206C? - HELD THAT - As noticed that the revenue had filed the appeal against the pronouncements decision 2016 (12) TMI 1534 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT under Section 260A along with other connected appeals whereby the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh decision. Accordingly, learned counsel for the revenue has stated that the order passed in the present appeals be also set aside and the matter be remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law. However, this prayer was opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents. Present appeals deserve to be allowed as the Tribunal had adjudicated the appeal by relying upon its earlier decision as cited in para 3 above. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 30.09.2015 passed by the Tribunal in each case are set aside and the matters are remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with law.

Issues:
1. Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against penalties imposed for non-collection of tax at source.
2. Tribunal's decision based on earlier case of the assessee.
3. Request for setting aside impugned orders and remanding the matter for fresh decision.

Analysis:

Issue 1:
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the penalties imposed for non-collection of tax at source under Section 206C. The appellant argued that the penalties were wrongly deleted by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). The substantial questions of law raised included whether the Tribunal was correct in law in deleting the penalties and if the order was contrary to the evidence and material on record. The High Court noted the contentions and set aside the impugned orders, remanding the matters to the Tribunal for fresh decision after providing an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

Issue 2:
The Tribunal's decision in the present case was based on its earlier decision concerning the same assessee for different assessment years. The Revenue had previously filed an appeal against the said decision, which was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh decision. The Revenue sought a similar course of action in the present appeals, urging the High Court to set aside the impugned orders and remand the matters for fresh decision. The High Court, after considering the arguments presented by both parties and examining the case records, agreed that the appeals should be allowed. The High Court concluded that the Tribunal had adjudicated the appeal by relying on its earlier decision, leading to the impugned orders being set aside and the matters remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision.

Issue 3:
The Revenue requested the High Court to set aside the impugned orders and remand the matters to the Tribunal for fresh decision, following a similar course of action taken in a previous appeal. The Revenue's counsel argued for setting aside the orders and providing an opportunity for fresh decision-making. However, the respondents' counsel opposed this prayer. After hearing both parties and examining the case records, the High Court found merit in the Revenue's arguments and decided to set aside the impugned orders, remanding the matters to the Tribunal for fresh decision after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties in accordance with the law.

← Previous Next →