9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .2015 setting aside the levy of penalty of Rs. 77,95,155/- came to be modified by restricting the quantum of penalty to Rs. 20,55,573/- 2. On 25.07.2013, a survey came to be conducted under section 133A of Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act') in the business premises of assessee and an order under section 201(1) of the Act came to be passed on 30.07.2013 enclosing therewith a demand notice. On 02.08.2013, assessee paid the amount demanded under the notice together with interest as required under section 201 (1) (A) of the Act. 3. Subsequently, proceedings under section 221 of the Act came to be initiated by issuance of show cause notice to assessee. A reply came to be submitted by the appellant contending that lapse in remi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or which swayed in the mind of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for setting aside the penalty levied is on the ground that assessee had subsequently remitted TDS along with interest under section 221(1)(A) of the Act @ 1.5% per month and as such, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) set aside the levy of penalty. 6. Revenue being aggrieved by said order preferred an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and tribunal while reversing the finding of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has extended olive branch to the assessee by restricting the levy of penalty to Rs. 20,55,573/- in lieu of Rs. 77,95,155/- which had been levied by the Assessing Officer. Hence, this appeal. 7. We have heard Ms. Varsha Shetty, learned counsel app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the business premises of appellant, the factum of non-remittance of TDS, which assessee had collected or retained with it had surfaced. It is on account of such survey conducted, proceedings under section 201(1)(A) of the Act was initiated and assessee in question was declared as an assessee in default under section 201 of the Act by order dated 30.07.2013. Said order has reached finality or in other words undisputedly assessee has not challenged the said order. 12. Pursuant to said order, demand was raised and immediately within four days i.e., on 02.08.2013, assessee remitted the amount along with interest. It is thereafter the penalty proceedings came to be initiated by issuing notice under section 221 of the Act to the assessee. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was not in the proximity of truth. This finding of fact which had been recorded by the Assessing Officer when being set aside by the 1st appellate authority the least that was expected from Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was to record a finding which would disprove said fact or in other words reasons had to be assigned. This exercise having not been undertaken by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and by a cryptic order as noticed herein, finding of the Assessing Officer having been set aside, this has persuaded the tribunal to reverse the finding of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and restore the finding of the Assessing Officer in part viz., affirming levy of penalty but reducing the quantum of penalty. We find from the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
