9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there were substantial liabilities on account of creditors. The assessee has placed reliance on the decision of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Porwal Creative Version P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT(TDS), Mumbai [2011 (3) TMI 880 - ITAT, Mumbai ] in which financial hitches have been accepted as reasonable cause for default in payment of tax. Once the delay in payment of tax is explained satisfactorily, penalty u/s. 272A(2)(k) of the Act cannot be levied for the period till payment of tax. Hence, we modify the order of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer is directed to levy the penalty u/s. 272A(2)(k) of the Act only for the delay in payment of tax by the assessee. The order of Ld. CIT(A) is modified accordingly. - Decided partly in favour o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eedings u/s. 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act , for short) were initiated. The assessee contended that the TDS returns could not be filed in time because the TDS was not deposited in time due to non-availability of funds. The said explanation was not found reasonable by the Assessing Officer, therefore he imposed the penalty which is as under:- Form Type Quarter Due date Date of filing Delay in days Amount of TDS Involved Amount of Penalty 24Q 1st 15.7.2007 20.1.2012 1650 0 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncerns for daily cash requirements. From 01/04/2008 to 31/03/2010, it was necessary to mention 95% of PAN of the deductees in case of salary and 85% in case of non-salary deductees. After deposit of TDS the company had made all possible efforts to obtain the required number of PANs from the deductees. The assessee failed to obtain the PANs as required to be filled up in the TDS returns as many of employees had left and many contractors / professionals had stopped working for the company the TDS returns could not be filed in time. Learned AR relied upon the order of the Mumbai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Porwal Creative Version P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT(TDS), Mumbai in I. T. A.Nos.5556 5557/Mum/2009. Learned AR submitted that the Tribunal has dele ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r paying the tax deducted to the credit of the Central Government within the prescribed time, [prepare such statements for such period as may be prescribed] and deliver or cause to be delivered to the prescribed income-tax authority or the person authorised by such authority such statement in such form and verified in such manner and setting forth such particulars and within such time as may be prescribed:] 8. Thus, under the provisions of sec. 200(3) r. W. R. 31A, a quarterly statement of TDS in Form No. 26Q is required to be filed by the assessee by 15th July, 15th Oct., 15th January 15th June (last quarter of the year. In all these cases, there was delay as indicated by Assessing Officer in his table, which was reproduced in this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent of tax under section 201(1A). Therefore in our view the period for levying the penalty has to be counted from the date of payment of tax because the delay in filing the return till the date of payment of tax is already explained on the ground that the assessee could not pay the taxes for which separate penal provisions exist. The assessee has also explained the reasons for not paying the tax to the Central Government in time which was because of financial difficulties. The assessee has filed the copies of P L account and balance sheet to substantiate the claim that it was incurring losses and there were substantial liabilities on account of creditors. The assessee has placed reliance on the decision of Mumbai Tribunal in which financi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
