9911796707
TMI Blog1978 (12) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which tax was worked out at Rs. 28,455. The assessee was required under s. 40A of the IT Act, 1961 to deposit this tax on or before 26th Sept., 1975 but the assessee failed to do so. Accordingly, the learned ITO started proceedings under s. 40A (3) of the IT Act, 1961. In reply, the assessee submitted as under; "The return of income in this case was submitted on 27th August, 1975 and deposited a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t forth before the learned ITO. 4. Before the Tribunal, on behalf of the assessee, it was contended that the assessee company filed the return of income on 27th August, 1975 declaring an income of Rs. 41,702. tax under s. 140A was payable on 26th Sept., 1975. The assessee deposited the tax to the extent of Rs.24,000 on 14th Nov., 1975 under s. 140A of the IT Act, 1961. The assessee did not make ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 140A of the Act on 14th Nov., 1975. The explanation of the assessee has been that on account of the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee, the entire payment of tax could not be paid. In the explanation, the assessee also took the stand that he was very anxious to make the payment of tax but on account of paucity of funds, the entire payment could not be made. This contention of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duced the quantum of penalty. 7. Looking to the aforesaid facts, in our opinion, there were reasonable causes which prevented the assessee from making the payment of tax in time under s. 140A of the IT Act, 1961. So, there is no justification for sustaining the penalty of Rs. 2,500. 8. For the reasons discussed above, the order of the learned AAC is cancelled. 9. In the result, the appeal is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
