9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (1) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... therefore, issued a notice under section 285A(2) to the assessee asking it to show cause why fine as envisaged in section 285A(2) be not imposed on it. After considering the reply dated 11-5-1987 of the assessee the learned Commissioner took the view that the assessee had committed the default. The particulars were filed by the assessee in Form No. 52 on 14-5-1987. He levied a fine of Rs. 5,000 on the assessee under the aforesaid provision. 2. On behalf of the assessee the contentions raised in the reply dated 11-5-1987 were reiterated and additionally reliance was placed on the following decisions :-- (1) Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC) ; (2) Vallabhdas Manjibhai Dholakia v. CIT [1975] 98 ITR 403 (Guj.) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... origin of clause 50 of the Finance Bill, 1988 it was mentioned in the Memorandum explaining the provisions of the said Bill [vide [1988] 170 ITR 197 Statute Section] as follows :-- " In view of the provisions of section 194C of the Income-tax Act, providing for deduction of tax at source by a person making payment to a contractor, the requirement of obtaining information under section 285A of the Act is no longer considered to be necessary. Therefore, as a measure of rationalisation it proposed to delete section 285A of the Income-tax Act. This amendment will take effect from 1st April, 1988. " It appears that there is a Form No. 26C prescribed with reference to section 194C. A comparison of Form No. 19C and Form No. 52 shows that they ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... trarily and whimsically. There is no decision contrary to the same, pointed out on behalf of the department. Further views to the same effect were also expressed in the Third Member decision of Delhi Bench 'A' in the case of Kaushal Diwan. In that case also the assessee had failed to furnish particulars under section 285A(1) in time but had filed them when called for. There also the same views were expressed by the Appellate Tribunal. It has already been seen that the Legislature while deleting the provision of section 285A was on considering the fact that section 194C which was already on the statute book, sufficed in order to plug evasion. I am therefore, of the considered view that the fine imposed by the learned Commissioner cannot be u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
