TANGEDCO - Tamil nadu Electricity Board, CHENNAI V. JCIT, CHENNAI

ITA 2227/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7171 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 05-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P RADHAKRISHNAN
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 273B

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHE NNAI . , . ! ! ! ! , ' ' ' ' # # # # BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.NOS.2227 AND 2228/MDS/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS :2008-09&2011-12 TANGEDCO TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD, TIDAL PARK, S.S. COMPLEX, TARAMANI ROAD, CHENNAI 600 113. [PAN: AADCT4784E] VS. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS RANGE I, NO. 121, M.G. ROAD, CHENNAI. ( $% $% $% $% /APPELLANT ) ( &'$% &'$% &'$% &'$% / RESPONDENT ) $% ( ) / APPELLANT BY : MRS.PUSHYA SITARAMAN, SR. ADVOCATE/ MRS. J. SREE VIDYA, ADVOCATE &'$% ( ) / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI P. RADHAKRISHNAN, JCIT ( * / DATE OF HEARING : 02.12.2014 +, ( * /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12.12.2014 - - - - / O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THESE TWO APPEALS FILED BY THE SAME ASSESSEE ARE DI RECTED AGAINST THE CONSOLIDATED ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOM E TAX (APPEALS) VII, CHENNAI, DATED 30.06.2014 RELEVANT TO THE ASSESSMEN T YEARS 2008-09 & 11-12. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, O&M, TANGEDCO, CHENNAI OF TNEB IS ONE OF THE DEDUCTOR OF INCOME TA X ASSESSED TO TAX FOR TDS I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A.. .. .NO NONO NOS SS S. .. .2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/1 11 14 44 4 2 PURPOSE UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF ITO, WARD I(6), C HENNAI UNDER THE TAN: CHEEO3453C. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09, IN THE PENALTY ORDER, THE JCIT, BY ORDER DATED 28.03.2012, HAS OBSERVED THAT AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 200(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, EVERY PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR DEDUCTING TAX SHALL WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME PREPARE SUCH STATEMENTS FOR SUCH PE RIOD AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED AND DELIVER OR CAUSE TO BE DELIVERED TO THE PRESCRI BED INCOME TAX AUTHORITY OR THE PERSON AUTHORIZED BY SUCH AUTHORITY, SUCH STATEMENT IN SUCH FORM AND VERIFIED IN SUCH MANNER AND SETTING FORTH SUCH PARTICULARS AND WITHIN SUCH TIME AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED. IN THIS CASE, FOR THE ENTIRE FINANCIAL YEAR 2007-08, THE DEDUCTOR HAS FAILED TO FILE THE PRESCRIBED QUARTERLY E-TDS RETUR NS IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM IN FORM NO. 24Q FOR THE QUARTERS ENDED 30.06.2007 AND 30.09.2007. AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT, THIS D EDUCTOR IS LIABLE TO PAY PENALTY OF .100/- FOR EVERY DAY DURING WHICH THE FAILURE CONTI NUES. HENCE, PENALTY NOTICE UNDER SECTION 272A(2)(K) R.W.S. 200(3) OF THE ACT W AS ISSUED AND SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE. AS THERE WAS NO RESPONSE FROM ASSESSEE AN D THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272A(2)(K) WAS LEVIED FOR .1,72,000/- FOR THE QUARTER ENDED 30.06.2007 AND .1,62,800/- FOR THE QUARTER ENDED 30.09.2007. 4. ON APPEAL, BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), IT WAS SUBMIT TED THAT THE TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE WAS DEPOSITED IN THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT WITH IN THE PRESCRIBED TIME AND THERE WAS NO LOSS OF REVENUE BUT ONLY A FAILURE TO FURNISH THE TDS RETURNS IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM. THE LD. CIT(A), AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A.. .. .NO NONO NOS SS S. .. .2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/1 11 14 44 4 3 ASSESSEE, A COMMON ORDER WAS PASSED FOR THE ASSESSM ENT YEAS 2008-09 AND 2011-12. THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE OF THE LD. CIT (A) IS EXTRACTED AS UNDER: 3.4 IT IS A FACT THAT THE QUARTERLY RETURNS FOR A YS 2008-09 AND 2011-12 WERE NOT FILED IN TIME. PERUSAL OF THE DELAYS IN FILING THE RETURNS FOR ALL THE QUARTERS IS ALARMING. DEDUCTING TAX AT SOURCE AND PAYING INTO G OVERNMENT A/C AND FILING OF QUARTERLY RETURNS ARE MANDATED BY INCOME-TAX ACT AN D DEDUCTION AND PAYMENT OF TAX IN TIME DO NOT ABSOLVE THE ASSESSEE FROM FIL ING RETURNS IN TIME. FILING OF RETURNS AS PER SEC.200(3) OF THE ACT IS A STATUTORY FUNCTION OF THE DEDUCTOR AND FAILURE TO DO SO NECESSARILY INVITES LEVY OF PENALT Y U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT. 3.5 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE DISCUSSION, I AM OF THE C ONSIDERED VIEW THAT IT IS A FIT CASE FOR LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS VIZ. 2008-09 AND 2011-12. THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ABLE TO PROVE THE REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FAILURE TO FILE THE RETURNS IN TIME FOR B OTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. SUFFICIENT OPPORTUNITIES WERE OFFERED TO THE ASSESS EE FOR EXPLAINING THE REASONS FOR NOT FILING THE RETURNS IN TIME WHICH THE ASSESS EE FAILED TO DO SO. HENCE THE ORDERS LEVYING PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT BY THE JCIT, TDS RANGE, CHENNAI ARE HEREBY CONFIRMED. 5. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH SIDES, PERUSED THE MATERIALS ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE CASE O F THE DEPARTMENT IS THAT THE ASSESSEE DEDUCTED TAX AT SOURCE AND FAILED TO FILE THE RETURN AS PER SECTION 200(3) OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT WAS LEVIED. THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED BEFORE THE LD. C IT(A) THAT WHEN THE TAX AT SOURCE WAS DEDUCTED AND THE SAME WAS DEPOSITED IN T HE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT IN TIME AND THERE WAS ONLY FAILURE TO FILE THE RETURNS IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM. HOWEVER, THE LD. CIT(A) DID NOT ACCEPT THE EXPLANAT ION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REASON THAT DEDUCTING TAX AT SOURCE AND PAY ING INTO GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT AND FILING OF QUARTERLY RETURNS ARE MANDATED BY INC OME TAX ACT AND CONFIRMED THE PENALTY ORDER PASSED BY THE JCIT. BEFORE US, THE LD . COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A. I.T.A.. .. .NO NONO NOS SS S. .. .2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228 2227 & 2228/M/ /M/ /M/ /M/1 11 14 44 4 4 HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE QUARTERL Y RETURNS ARE DUE TO SHIFTING OF THE OFFICE PREMISES AND IT IS NOT WILFUL OR WANTON. WE FIND THAT THE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN NOT FILING THE QUARTERLY RE TURN IN TIME, THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSEES CASE IS COVERED BY SECTION 273B OF THE ACT. ACCORDINGLY, THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER IS DELETED. 6. FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 ALSO THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS SIMILAR ON IDENTICAL FACTS AND ACCORDINGLY, WE DELE TE THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 272A(2)(K) OF THE A CT. 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE AS SESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON FRIDAY, THE 12 TH OF DECEMBER, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (V. DURGA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 12.12.2014 VM/- - ( &'*/0 10,* /COPY TO: 1. $% / APPELLANT, 2. &'$% / RESPONDENT, 3. 2 ( ) /CIT(A), 4. 2 /CIT, 5. 03 &'*' /DR & 6. 4! 5 /GF.