9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hether there was any evidence with respect to the reason for the assessee's inability to file the returns in time - Case remitted back to CIT - Decided in favour of assessee. - TAX APPEAL NO. 308 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 25-3-2013 - AKIL KURESHI AND SONIA GOKANI, JJ. For the Appellant : Tushar P. Hemani and Ms. Vaibhavi K. Parikh. For the Respondent : Mrs. Mauna and M. Bhatt. ORDER:- PER : Akil Kureshi In response to notice for final disposal issued by us, learned counsel, Mrs. Mauna Bhatt has appeared for the revenue. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 25.11.2011 raising following questions for our consideration: "(i) Whether in the facts and ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le details of such tax deducted along with the PAN numbers of the deductees. It is not in dispute that the assessee did not file such necessary details in Form 24Q and 26Q, prescribed under the Income Tax Rules. For the assessment year 2007-08, the assessee had to file quarterly forms. Finally, though the assessee did file such details, number of total days, by which such four quarterly declarations were delayed, came to 3101 days. On such basis, the Assessing Officer instituted penalty proceedings under section 272 A(2)(k) of the Act. The assessee did not appear before the Assessing Officer. Assessing Officer, therefore, issued ex parte order and levied penalty @ Rs. 100/- per day of delay and thereby imposed penalty of Rs. 3.10 lacs, as m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20.09.2010 as against the due date of 15.06.2007. Therefore, keeping in view the aforesaid facts I do not find any penalty levied u/s. 272A(2)(k) of the Act. In view of this the penalty leveid by the A.O. is hereby deleted." 6. Aggrieved by such order of CIT(A), the revenue approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the revenue's appeal observing inter alia that no evidence has been brought before the Tribunal to show that there was any correspondence undertaken by the assessee with the deductees for obtaining PAN numbers and that such PAN numbers were obtained only in the year 2010 when such quarterly returns were filed. 7. The assessee is, therefore, before us in the present appeal. 8. Learned Counsel Mr. Hemani for the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cuments which were on record before the CIT(A). Such documents, prima facie, we wonder, whether would throw any light on the reasons which prevented the assessee from filing the returns within the prescribed time limit. However, we need not conclude this issue since we are of the opinion that in facts of the case, the entire issue should be placed back before the CIT(A) for fresh consideration in accordance with law. For such purpose the appellate order of the CIT(A) dated 29.09.2010 and that of the Tribunal dated 25.11.2011 are quashed. It is clarified that before the Commissioner, the assessee would have opportunity to produce additional documents, if so desired, subject to of course fulfilment of requirement under Rule 46A of the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
