CANAAN ENGINEERING P. LTD, MUMBAI V. ITO WD 8(1)(3), MUMBAI

ITA 2262/MUM/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 226219914 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 04-05-2011
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 22-03-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S S RANA
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHESH R KARANI
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI, J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A ND SMT. ASHA VIJAYRAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 2262/MUM./2010 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 ) DATE OF HEARING: 4.5.2011 M/S. CANAAN ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. VAISHETPADA NO.2, NR. TRIVENI NAGAR MALAD (E), MUMBAI 400 097 PAN AACCC6135F .. APPELLANT V/S THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-8(1)(4), MUMBAI .... RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : MR. MAHESH R. KARANI REVENUE BY : MR. S.S. RANA O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 18 TH DECEMBER 2009, PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS )- XVI, MUMBAI, FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08, WHEREIN T HE ASSESSEE DISPUTES CONFIRMATION OF PENALTY BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEAL S), IMPOSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 221(1) OF THE INCOM E TAX ACT, 1961 (FOR SHORT THE ACT ). 2. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO PAY SELF -ASSESSMENT TAX OF ` 15,09,158, ON / OR BEFORE 30 TH NOVEMBER 2007. THE AMOUNT WAS PAID WITH A DELAY OF SIX DAYS. SHOW CAUSE NOTICE WAS GIVEN ON 2 5 TH NOVEMBER 2008. THE ASSESSEES REPLY STATING THAT, HE HAD FINANCIAL STR INGENCIES AND WITH GREAT M/S. CANAAN ENGINEERING PVT. LTD. ITA NO.2262 /MUM./2010 2 DIFFICULTIES, HE PAID THE TAX ON 7 TH NOVEMBER 2007. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THIS EXPLANATION AND LEVIED PENALTY UNDER SECTION 221(1). ON APPEAL, THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) CONFIRMED THE PE NALTY. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL, MR. MAHESH R. KA RANI, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE LEARNED DE PARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, MR. S.S. RANA. ON A CAREFUL CONSIDE RATION OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND A PERUSAL OF THE PAPE RS ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE ARE OF THE OPIN ION THAT THE DELAY IS MARGINAL AND LEVY OF PENALTY, UNDER THESE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IS NOT WARRANTED. THE ASSESSEE HAD EXPLAINED THE DELAY. THE NOTICE FOR LEVY OF PENALTY WAS ISSUED MUCH BEFORE THE LAST DAT E FOR PAYMENT OF TAX. AS THIS IS NOT A WILLFUL NEGLEGENCE ON THE PART OF ASS ESSEE AND THE EXPLANATION GIVEN IS REASONABLE. THE ASSESSEE HAS DEMONSTRATED THAT IT IS PREVENTED BY REASONABLE CAUSE FROM PAYING THE TAX IN QUESTION IN TIME, AS IT HAD FINANCIAL CRUNCH. AT THE EXPLANATION IS BONAFIDE, WE SET ASID E THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) AND DELETE THE PENALTY. THIS GROUND IS, THUS, ALLOWED. 4. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 13.5.2011 SD/- ASHA VIJAYRAGHAVAN JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- J. SUDHAKAR REDDY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 13.5.2011 COPY TO : (1) THE ASSESSEE (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) THE CIT(A), MUMBAI, CONCERNED (4) THE CIT, MUMBAI CITY CONCERNED (5) THE DR, C BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI TRUE COPY BY ORDER PRADEEP J. CHOWDHURY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI