M/s Luxmi Rice Mills, Kurukshetra V. JCIT (TDS), Karnal

ITA 2215/DEL/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9008 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 5 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 25-04-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHIMA NEB
• Assessee Lawyers: GURMEET SINGH
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 273B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH E, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2215/DEL/2016 : ASSTT. YE AR : 2010-11 M/S LUXMI RICE MILLS KAITHAL ROAD, PEHOWA, DISTT KURUKSHETRA PAN : AAAFL5783B VS J CIT (TDS) RANGE, KARNAL (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SH. GURMEET SINGH, CA REVENUE BY : SMT. ASHIMA NEB, SR. DR DATE OF H EARING : 16/10/2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16/10/2018 ORDER PER BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICAL MEMBER PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAINST O RDER DATED 12/02/16 PASSED BY LD. CIT (A)-2, GURGAON, ON FOLLO WING GROUND OF APPEAL: 1. BECAUSE THE ACTION IS UNDER CHALLENGE ON FACTS & LA W, FOR IMPOSING THE PENALTY TO THE TUNE OF RS. 14,077/- (1 ST QUARTER), RS. 3,372/- (2 ND QUARTER) & RS. 23,002/- (3 RD QUARTER) FOR THE AY 2010-11 U/S 272A(2)(K) TOTALING RS. 40,451/- FOR LATE ITA NO.2215 /DEL/2016 (LUXMI RICE MILLS) 2 FILING OF E-TDS RETURN WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE CIR CUMSTANCES & BONAFIDE OF THE DEDUCTOR. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: 1. AS PER INFORMATION AVAILABLE WITH DEPARTMENT, AS SESSEE HAD DEDUCTED TDS FOR EACH QUARTER AND THE SAME BUT DELA Y OCCURRED IN FILING OF QUARTERLY RETURNS. DETAILS OF DELAY IS AS UNDER: F.Y. QUARTER DUE DATE DATE OF FILING DELAY (DAYS) 2009-10 26Q-2 ND 15/10/2009 09/04/2011 541 F.Y. QUARTER DUE DATE DATE OF FILING DELAY (DAYS) 2009-10 26Q-3 RD 15/06/2010 09/04/2011 449 F.Y. QUARTER DUE DATE DATE OF FILING DELAY (DAYS) 2009-10 26Q-4 TH 15/06/2010 09/04/2011 298 2. LD. AO ISSUED NOTICE FOR INITIATION OF PENALTY P ROCEEDINGS UNDER SECTION 272 A (2) (K) OF THE ACT. IN REPLY TO THE NOTICE, ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT TDS DEDUCTED WAS DEPOSITED WITHIN TIME, HOWEVER DUE TO INADVERTENT CIRCUMSTANCES RETURNS CO ULD NOT BE FILED ON TIME, AND ASSESSEE HAD NO INTENTION TO DEF Y LAW. 3. LD. AO AFTER CONSIDERING REPLY FILED BY ASSESSEE , REJECTED THE SAME ON BASIS THAT ASSESSEE WAS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE TO COMPLY WITH NECESSARY REGULATIONS. HE THUS HELD ASSESSEE TO BE IN DEFAULT FOR NOT FILING OF TEDIOUS RETURN IN TIME AND IMPOSED PENALT Y AS UNDER: S.NO. FINANCIAL YEAR QUARTER DELAY IN FILING PENALTY LEVIED 1 2009 - 10 26Q - 2 ND 541 14077/ - ITA NO.2215 /DEL/2016 (LUXMI RICE MILLS) 3 2 2009 - 10 26Q - 3 RD 449 3372/ - 3. 2009 - 10 26Q - 4 TH 298 20 3002/ - 4. AGGRIEVED BY PENALTY LEVIED, ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT (A) WHO UPHELD THE ORDER PASSED BY LD.A O. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) ASSESSEE IS I N APPEAL BEFORE US NOW. 5. LD.AR SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS GENUINE DIFFICULT Y DURING RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR IN FILING OF TDS RETURNS DU E TO E- COMPLIANCE, THAT WAS INTRODUCED FOR 1 ST TIME. HE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR ASSESSEE TO FILE R ETURNS BELATEDLY, AND BENEFIT UNDER SECTION 273B OF THE ACT MUST BE A PPLICABLE TO PRESENT FACTS OF THE CASE. 6. ON THE CONTRARY, LD. SR. DR SUBMITTED THAT ASSES SEE HAD NOT ESTABLISHED REASONABLE CAUSE AS ARGUED. SHE SUBMITT ED THAT BEFORE LD. AO ASSESSEE HAD NOT EXPRESSED ANY HARDSHIP, AND THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE ACCEPTED. PLACING RELIANCE UPON THE ORDER S PASSED BY AUTHORITIES BELOW, LD. SR. DR SUPPORTED THE ORDER O F LD.AO. WE HAVE PERUSED THE SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY BOTH THE S IDES AND THE LIGHT OF THE RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US. 7. IN THE FACTS PREVALENT FOR US ADMITTEDLY, THERE HAS BEEN NO DELAY IN DEPOSITING THE TDS TO GOVERNMENT TREASURY. HOWEVER DELAY OCCURRED IN FILING OF QUARTERLY TDS RETURNS. IT IS AN ADMITTED POSITION THAT DURING FINANCIAL YEAR 2010-11, THERE WAS A SWITCHOVER OF FILING OF TDS RETURN IN PAPER FORMS TO E-FILING, BY WAY OF ITA NO.2215 /DEL/2016 (LUXMI RICE MILLS) 4 AMENDMENT IN RULES. ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED TO HAVE FACED PROBLEMS IN E-FILING OF TDS RETURNS FOR RELEVANT PE RIOD. 8. IT IS OBSERVED THAT VARIOUS HIGH COURTS, INCLUDI NG JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT BEING HONBLE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT , IN CASE OF HMT LTD VS. CIT REPORTED IN (2004) 140 TAXMANN 606 AS WELL AS HONBLE DELHI HIGH COURT AND COORDINATE BENCHES OF THIS TRIBUNAL, HAS TAKEN NOTE OF THIS CHANGE AT VAR IOUS OCCASIONS WHICH CONSTITUTED HARDSHIPS TO ASSESSEE. IT HAS BEE N CONSISTENTLY OBSERVED FOR RELEVANT PERIOD BY VARIOUS AUTHORITIES , THAT DUE TO SOFTWARE INSTALLED BY REVENUE FOR E-FILING OF TDS R ETURNS, INITIAL TECHNOLOGICAL GLITCHES HAS CAUSED DELAY IN FILING O F QUARTERLY STATEMENTS OF TDS, FOR WHICH NO PENALTY CAN BE LEVI ED ON ASSESSEE. IN PRESENT FACTS, ASSESSEE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED TO HA VE FACED SIMILAR DIFFICULTIES DUE TO WHICH DELAY OCCURRED. 9. WE THEREFORE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS LAID DOWN IN AFORESTATED CASES, DO NOT AGREE WITH ORDER PASSED B Y LD. CIT (A) IN LEVYING PENALTY FOR LATE FILING OF TDS RETURNS. ACC ORDINGLY WE DELETE PENALTY LEVIED, AND GROUNDS RAISED BY ASSESSEE STAN DS ALLOWED. 10. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE STANDS A LLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 16 /10/2018. SD/- SD/- (N.K. SAINI) (BEENA A PILLAI) VICE PRESIDENT JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 16/10/2018 SH ITA NO.2215 /DEL/2016 (LUXMI RICE MILLS) 5 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR