Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2021 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (7) TMI 418 - HC - Income TaxOffences u/s 276 B read with 278B - petitioners paid TDS amount collected from the employees, belatedly after a period of eight months - HELD THAT - In this case, the petitioners have taken out a reasonable cause for the failure on their part in paying the TDS amount that due to financial constraints faced by the company, it was only recorded in the registers, as if salary to the employees was paid, but in fact, the salary was paid to the employees only in the month of September 2012 and immediately they have also remitted the TDS amount with interest for the delayed payment to the department. It is for the competent authority to take a call on the documents to be produced by the petitioners for substantiating their case that they are having reasonable cause for such failure for payment of the TDS amount and therefore, the matter is remitted to the first respondent to consider the issue afresh, as per the provisions u/s 278AA and 279 (2) of the Income Tax Act and pass appropriate orders on merits and the petitioners are permitted to produce the documents in their support to the first respondent.
Issues:
Seeking to quash proceedings for delayed TDS payment under Income Tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The petitioners filed a Criminal Original Petition to quash proceedings against them in C.C.No.15 of 2016 for delayed TDS payment under Section 276 B read with 278 B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The petitioners argued that the delay in remitting the TDS amount was due to financial constraints faced by the company during the year 2012-2013. They contended that they paid the salaries to employees in September 2012 and deducted the TDS amount, remitting it to the Income Tax Department with interest for the delay. The petitioners relied on Section 278 AA of the Income Tax Act, which provides that no person shall be punishable for failure if there was a reasonable cause for such failure. Additionally, they cited Section 279(2) of the Act, which allows compounding of the offence before or after the institution of proceedings if there is a reasonable cause for the failure. The respondent, represented by counsel Ms. Srimathy from the Income Tax Department, argued that the petitioners must satisfy the authority with relevant materials to prove a reasonable cause for the delayed TDS payment. It was emphasized that if a reasonable cause is established, the authority can consider it even after the institution of proceedings under Section 279(2) of the Act. After hearing both counsels and examining the records, the court found that the petitioners had shown a reasonable cause for the delay in TDS payment due to financial constraints faced by the company. The court noted that the salary was actually paid to employees in September 2012, and the TDS amount was remitted with interest for the delay. The court held that it is the competent authority's responsibility to evaluate the documents provided by the petitioners to substantiate their reasonable cause for the delayed payment. Therefore, the matter was remitted to the first respondent to reconsider the issue in accordance with Sections 278AA and 279(2) of the Income Tax Act, allowing the petitioners to submit supporting documents. Consequently, the Criminal Original Petition was disposed of with the direction for the first respondent to review the case based on the petitioners' reasonable cause for the delayed TDS payment, as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed as a result.
|