9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is concerned. 2. That the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that even though the Assessee had sufficient Cash and Bank balance, it had ignored to pay the tax dues. 3. That the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the Assessee has not exhibited reasonable cause to explain the delay in filing the returns. 4. That the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that provisions of Section 271F has been introduced only as a measure to ensure timely filing of Returns by taxpayer so as to enable the AO to carry out necessary further action with respect to the returns as prescribed under the Act and it does not provide for the non levy of Penalty u/s 271F on account of financial hardship. 5. That the CIT(A) has e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and remand the question of existence of reasonable cause under section 273B of the Act for fresh consideration by the Ld.AO in the light of additional evidence filed before the Tribunal. 7. In the remand proceedings the Ld.AO issued fresh notice giving an opportunity to assessee. Assessee filed various details like bank statement financial statements etc. Ld.AO however observed that assessee had sufficient back balance in the bank to pay the income tax dues however the same was ignored. 8. The Ld.AO once again confirmed the penalty of Rs. 5000/- for violation of section 271F of the Act. 9. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.AO, assessee preferred appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). 10. The Ld.CIT(A) relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation expenses, cannot he paid in priority over dues of workmen secured creditors. Also, the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in the case of Leo Edibles & Fats Ltd Vs. Tax Recovery Officer (central), Hyderabad [2018] 99 taxmann.com 226 has held that Income-tax department cannot claim any prior(y payment from liquidation estate merely because it had issued attachment eider prior to initiation of liquidation proceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. 6.3 From the above discussion made under the Act, it is clear that preference should be given in the manner as the company has actually done. It is seen from the analysis the bank A/c the company was in financial difficulties and was trying to get a loan from CITI Bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is a categorical finding returned by Ld.CIT(A) that assessee was unable to get loan from Citibank for meeting the expenses and Citibank also refused to extend the loan. Subsequently assessee was waiting for funds from the principle which was received only after 31/03/2013 by issue of series of 3 preferred stock. It has been observed by Ld.CIT(A) that the funds have been raised by assessee from issue of stock by the principle to the subsidiary, out of which the taxes were paid immediately and IT returns were furnished. 17. We observe that Ld.CIT(A) has considered the financial difficulties faced by assessee in a very practical manner thereby deleting the penalty of Rs. 5000/- levied under section 271F of the act. This view is also suppor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
