9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the pecularity of the facts in the present case where there was a change effected in the IT system for mandatory requirement of PANs of all deductees before the returns can be validated and uploaded, the fact that there were large number of deductees spread throughout the country and efforts were made by the assessee to obtain their PANs numbers, the fact that taxes have been deducted and deposited, hence no loss to the Revenue, we find that assessee has a reasonable cause for delayed filing of its e-TDS returns in terms of section 273B and the penalty under section 272(A)(K) is hereby deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 522/JP/16 - - - Dated:- 24-5-2017 - Shri Kul Bharat, JM And Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, AM Assessee by : Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) Revenue by : Shri Rajendra Jha (JCIT) ORDER Per Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, A. M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A) - III, Jaipur dated 19.02.2016 for A.Y. 2011-12 wherein the assessee has challenged the levy penalty of ₹ 1,02,400/- u/s 272A(2)(K) of the Act. 2. The ld. AO imposed penalty U/s 272A(2)(K) of the Act holding that the assessee company has del ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmitted that there were large number of small deductees to whom payments were made by the company and these were scattered throughout the country. It took great efforts in collecting PAN of all the deductees and the ld. CIT(A) has not disputed the number of the deductees as per details below: Quarter Number of deductees Q1 1438 Q2 1440 Q3 1329 Q4 653 4.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in observing that delay of 1024 days does reveal a willful attempt on part of appellant for non compliance of the said provisions. In this regard, it is submitted that various benches of Hon ble ITAT have accepted delay of equivalent days or more as a reasonable cause and penalty has been deleted. Details of the same are as under: S. No Case A.Y. No. of days of delay in furnishing TDS return 1. Branch Manager, State Bank of India v. ACIT [2014] 41 taxmann.com 26 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hould have been accepted as reasonable cause. In this regard, the attention is drawn towards the decision of Hon ble ITAT Jaipur Bench in the case of Shri Ganesham Electronics vs. ACIT (TDS) ITA No. 181/JP/2014 wherein non availability of PAN was acknowledged and treated as reasonable cause. The relevant extract is set out here for the sake convenience. ..2.1 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. It is observed that the issue in question is squarely covered by the decision dated 6-11-2015 of ITAT Jaipur (SMC) Bench in the case of M/s. Kaler Electricals (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT, Circle- Sikar (ITA No. 283/JP/2015 for the assessment year 2010-11) wherein it has been observed as under:- 3. After hearing the ld DR and carefully considered his submission alongwith orders of the tax authorities below, I noted that the assessee has submitted an explanation before the Assessing Officer why the return for the F.Y. 2009-10 were filed late. The assessee submitted that the employee of the assessee looking after TDS could not do the work because of ill health and mental stress and this came to the knowledge of the Director very late. The Director ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 - Assessee-bank failed to file return of tax deducted at source within specified time - It was explained that due to shortage of staff and heavy pressure of work then managers were unable to file return within due date - It was also explained that due to lack of information of PAN of deductees, filing of return was delayed - Assistant Commissioner, however, rejected explanation of assessee and imposed penalty under section 272A(2)(k) - Whether since there was neither any wilful negligence nor any mala fide on part of assessees in matter of compliance and delay was due to reasonable cause, impugned order of penalty was to be cancelled - Held, yes [Paras 9 10] [In favour of assessee]. C) Branch Manager, State Bank of India v. ACIT [2014] 41 taxmann.com 268 (Cuttack - Trib.): Head note ..Section 272A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For failure to answer question, sign statements, etc. [Delay in filing e-TDS return] - Assessment year 2009-10 - There was a delay of 848 days in first quarter, 756 days in second quarter, 664 days in third quarter and 513 days in fourth quarter of financial year 2008-09 on part of assessee-bank in filing e-TDS return - Assessing Offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... relied upon and the facts of the assessee s case are different as submitted below: S. No Facts of Shah Traders v. DCIT(Patna Bench) [1996] 56 ITD 33 (PAT.) Case of Assessee 1. Penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) Penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) 2. In the case return was not furnished even after issuing show cause notice. In the case return was furnished before issuing show cause notice. 3. The assessee further did not file return till the date of penalty order. The assessee filed its TDS Return well before the penalty order dated 29.04.2013. 4. No reasonable cause of delay was put forward to the CIT(A) by the assessee. Genuine reasons and reasonable cause was put forward before CIT (A). S.No. ACME Consuction Co. v. DCIT( ITAT Patna Bench) [1999] 68 ITD 1 (PAT.) Case of Assessee 1. Penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) Pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. In the instant case, there is no such factual situation before us rather there is a delay in filing of quarterly e-TDS returns which is covered under the provisions of section 272A(2)(C) of the Act. Hence, on this ground itself, where the Assessing Officer is not clear about basis of the charge, the levy of penalty cannot be sustained. 7. On merits, it is noted that during the financial year 2010-11 which is under consideration before us, there was a change which was brought about in filing of e-TDS returns wherein there was a necessity to mention 100% valid Permanent Account Numbers of the payee to whom the payment has been made and TDS done in such payment in the e-TDS return and thereafter only the e-TDS return can be validated and uploaded in the IT system. The same has been the position of the CBDT vide its notification dated 31.5.2010. The assessee has submitted that since there were large number of deductees scattered throughout the country, a fact not disputed by the Revenue, it took them some time to collect the PANs of these deductees and thereafter, it was able to upload the e-TDS returns in the IT system maintained by the Revenue. Further, the taxes have d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
