9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 545X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... information is specifically asked by ITO, CIB in a particular format may be on the strength of internal instructions. For example, the Time Deposits exceeding ₹ 2 Lakhs under code No. 003 is not to be generally furnished by the banks to the department in the presribed annual return, likewise, other codes also for which different amounts were prescribed by the Act. This indicates that this information was specifically asked for by the ITO, CIB. Instead of giving this separate notice for each code, a common notice was issued for all the three codes. Addl. CIT initiated penalty proceedings by issuing only one notice but levied penalty for three notices as extracted above. This indicates that without issuing notice, the Addl. CIT, CIB ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... company. 27-09-2010 Code No. 006 Payment in cash for purchase of bank drafts or pay orders or bankers cheque from a banking company of an amount aggregating ₹ 1,00,000/- or more during any one day. 27-09-2010 Code No. 007 Deposit in cash aggregating ₹ 2,00,000 or more, with banking company during any one day. 3. As seen from the notice issued on 27-09-2010 under the 3 codes, assessee was to submit the information by 20-10-2010. As there was no compliance to the notice, on 07-01-2011 another letter was issued. On 10th February, 2011, notice u/s. 272A(2)(c) issued to show cause why penalty should not be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11 1510 Malakpet Branch 23-02-2011 20-04-2011 1511 R C Puram Branch 17-02-2011 08-04-2011 1512 Habsiguda Branch -- 15-04-2011 1513 Kachiguda Branch 22-02-2011 08-04-2011 4. However, the Addl. CIT considered the non-submission of information as willful default and levied penalty in all the cases in February 2011 as under: The compliance to the first notice was due on 20-10-2010 as no details were filed and no compliance was made the default commenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, the branches received the second notice dt. 08-12-2010, which was not mentioned in the penalty order. In compliance to that notice, as the bank is not a direct assessee and Head Office is located in Manipal, Karnataka State, the matter was referred to the Head Office. Branch has to obtain prior approvals and directions from their central office. Since this process has taken more than 45 days, assessee could not comply to general notice issued. In the mean time, Addl. CIT issued show cause notice of penalty proceedings. Thereafter, it approached the officer for providing sufficient time to comply with the show cause notice. The banks requested for an opportunity and asked time of 40 days in lieu of operational difficulties such as 31st M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice but levied for various other periods also, the details of which are not in the knowledge of assessees. Ld. DR after referring the matter to the AO submitted that the records could not be traced at present and expressed his inability to furnish the necessary details. He relied on the orders of Addl. CIT levying penalty. 9. After considering the rival contentions and perusing the case law relied upon by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee, I am of the opinion that there is no need for levy of penalty in the given cases. First of all, the notice issued u/s. 136 is a general notice asking for information which is not in the domain of the ITO, CIB. The CBDT itself has prescribed certain limits for calling for information and Income tax Act a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e notices have been properly issued or not? For these reasons, it is difficult to sustain penalties as levied by the Addl. CIT. 11. Not only that, the penalty u/s. 272A(2)(c), is subject to provisions of Section 273B. Section 273B of the Act provides an exception to the rigid provisions of Section 272A by providing that in the event of assessee having a reasonable cause for the failure, penalty shall not be imposed by the authorities concerned. As submitted by the Ld. Counsel in its case, assessee being only a branch office of the public sector bank with head Office at Manipal, it took some time to get necessary approvals and further, because of the year ending business and shortage of staff, there was delay in complying to the notice. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
