GANESHAM ELECTRONICS, Jaipur V. ADDL. CIT, Jaipur

ITA 181/JPR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5512 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 22 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-01-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 07-03-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAJINDER SINGH JCIT DR DHK
• Assessee Lawyers: SHARVAN KUMAR GUPTA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 273B

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI R.P. TOLANI, JUDICIAL MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 181/JP/2014 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 SHRI GANESHAM ELECTRONICS SHOP NO.41-50, NURSERY CIRCLE VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR CUKE VS. THE ADDL. CIT (TDS ) RANGE- JAIPUR JAIPUR LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO .: JPRG 05273 C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI SHARVAN KUMAR GUPTA, ADVOCATE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJINDER SINGH, JCIT- DR LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 15/12/2015 ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27 /01/2016 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER R.P. TOLANI, JM THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-III, JAIPUR DATED 01-01-2014 FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAR 2010-11 CHALLENGING THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY AMOUNTING TO RS. 42,881/- U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 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 JAI PUR (SMC) BENCH ITA NO. 181/JP/2014 M/S. GANESHAM ELECTRONICS, JAIPUR VS. ADDL. CIT (T DS) , RANGE- JAIPUR . 2 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) WH EREIN IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED AS UNDER:- 3. AFTER HEARING THE LD DR AND CAREFULLY CON SIDERED HIS SUBMISSION ALONGWITH ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTHORITIES BELOW, I NOTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED AN EXPLANATION BEFO RE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHY THE RETURN FOR THE F.Y. 2009-10 WERE FI LED LATE. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE EMPLOYEE OF THE ASSESSE E 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 WAS BUSY IN THE EXPANSION OF THE BUSINESS AND INSTALLATION OF A NEW PLANT AT PALSANA AND THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO WILLFUL INTENTION NOT TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISION. IT WAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT CITING OF THE PAN WAS MANDATORY VIDE CIRCULAR DATED 12/2/2008 AND THEREFORE, THE GDS RETURN WERE NOT AC CEPTED BY THE COMPUTER. THE PAN WAS RECEIVED VERY LATE IN THE CAS E OF SAI ADVERTISING AGENCY. THE FACTS WERE NOT DENIED BY TH E LD DR, IN MY OPINION, THE DEFAULT WAS MERE A TECHNICAL BREACH. I T IS A CASE OF ASSESSEE THAT HE HAS DULY DEDUCTED THE TAX AND PAID THE TAX. THE PROVISION OF SECTION 273B OF THE ACT MANDATES THAT IF THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED BY THE REASONABLE CAUSE, THEREFORE, N O PENALTY SHOULD BE LEVIED. THIS PROVISION INCLUDES WITHIN IT S FAULT SECTION 272A(2), I, THEREFORE, SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE L D CIT(A) AND DELETE THE PENALTY IMPOSED. MY AFORESAID VIEW IS DU LY SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER (2003) 131 TAXMAN 596 ( RAJ.) 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. 2.2 RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF ITAT JAI PUR BENCH (SUPRA), THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ITA NO. 181/JP/2014 M/S. GANESHAM ELECTRONICS, JAIPUR VS. ADDL. CIT (T DS) , RANGE- JAIPUR . 3 3.0 IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOW ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27 /01/2 016. SD/- VKJ-IH-RKSYKUH (R.P.TOLANI) U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 27 /01/ 2016 *MISHRA VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT- M/S. GANESHAM ELECTRONICS, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT- THE ADDL. CIT (TDS ), RANGE- JAIPU R 3. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ CIT(A). 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT, 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 181/JP/2014) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR