9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enience. 2. ITA No. 642(Jp)/94 is an appeal by assessee while ITA No. 694(Jp)/94 is appeal by Revenue, both for asst. yr. 1989-90 and are directed against the same order of CIT(A) Ajmer, dt. 24th Jan., 1994. The assessee is aggrieved against the non-cancellation of penalty, though restricted to the amount of the TDS liability and the Revenue is aggrieved against the reduction of quantum of penal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted in s. 206 by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, w.e.f. 27th Sept., 1991. He has contended that the time-limit provided in r. 37 was in excess of the power of rule-making authority and so the rule to that extent can be ignored. He has cited Ginners Pressers Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (1994) 47 TTJ (Bom) 393. (1993) 46 ITD 185 (Bom), ITO vs. Alhusain Construction (P) Ltd. (1999) 64 TTJ (Mumbai) 451 : (1999) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the rival contentions, the relevant material on record as also the cited decisions. As regards the period prescribed under r. 37 being not applicable for furnishing of TDS return in asst. yr. 1989-90 we find the contention of the learned authorised representative of assessee to be quite weighty and in view of the decision of Bombay Tribunal, reported in (1994) 47 TTJ (Bom) 395 : (1993) 46 ITD 185 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re, delete the penalty. In the circumstances the question of restoring the order of AO in respect of the quantum of penalty as against the impugned order of CIT(A) in reducing the same also does not arise; and the contention of the learned Departmental Representative of Revenue also fads 6. In the result, the assessee's appeal being ITA No. 642/(Jp)/94 is allowed, whereas the Revenue's appeal be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
