9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 645X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty u/s,.272A(2)(k) of the I.T. Act of ₹ 3,10,200/- for A.Y. 2007-08 by the A.O. even though assessee had filed form No.26Q late by 3101 days. (3360 days-as Actual date of filing is 20.09.2010) 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary. 5. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) may be cancelled and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored to the above effect. 2. Regarding ground No.1, it was submitted by the Ld. D.R. that no reason has been given by Ld. CIT(A) for condoning the delay of 529 days for filing the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the TDS was deducted from small truck operators and their PAN was not available and this was the reason for delay in filing Form 26Q which is a reasonable cause and hence, penalty is not justified. The second contention raised by him is that it is a technical and venial breach and hence, penalty is not justified and in support of this contention, reliance was placed on the judgement of Hon ble Gujarat High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 244 ITR 417. He also placed reliance on the tribunal decision in the case of Addl. CIT (TDS), Lucknow Vs Smt. Sushma Tiwari in I.T.A.No. 54/LKO/2011 dated 06.04.2011 and submitted a copy of the tribunal decision. 6. We have considered the rival submiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ductees on the basis of these quarterly returns as to whether they have filed their returns or not and whether they have paid the taxes or not and in the absence of filing quarterly returns by the assessee deductor, there may be loss of revenue because in the absence of such quarterly returns, the department cannot proceed against the deductee even if no return is filed by them or even if portion of income is not declared by them. Hence this reason given by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court that there is no loss of revenue is not present in the present case. 7. The second reason given by the Hon ble Gujarat High Court is that the Tribunal has arrived at a conclusion that it was a bona fide mistake. In the present case, no such evidence has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t case that quarterly statements could not be filed earlier because of lack of knowledge and it was not intentional or willful. In the present case, the assessment year involved is 2007-08 and the quarterly returns were filed on 20.09.2010 even after filing of appeal before Ld. CIT(A) which was filed before CIT(A) on 09.09.2010. No one appeared before the A.O. in the course of penalty proceedings and no submission was made for the reason about non filing of quarterly returns in Form 26Q. Before CIT(A), this submissions was made that it could not be filed because the assessee was not having PAN of the deductees but no evidence has been brought on record to show that PAN of the deductees were obtained in 2010 justifying the delay in filing qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
