R.R. Enterprises, New Delhi V. ACIT (CPC- TDS), Ghaziabad

ITA 2330/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1004 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 7 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: F
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 18-04-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SURENDER PAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; TDS
• Section: 234E; 200A

Judgement Text

ITA NO.- 2330/DEL/2017 R.R. ENTERPRISES PAGE 1 OF 8 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH: F: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO:- 2330/DEL/2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2016-17) R.R. ENTERPRISES, Z-45, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE-II, NEW DELHI-110020. VS . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC-TDS, VAISHALI, GHAZIABAD (UP). PAN NO: A AAHR4142Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : NONE REVENUE BY : SHRI SURENDER PAL, SR. DR ORDER PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, AM [A] THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 31.01.2017 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-41, DELHI, [IN SHORT, LD.CIT(A)] PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YE AR 2016-17. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF APPEAL:- 1. THAT UNDER THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE C ASE, IT WAS NOT JUSTIFIED ON THE PART OF THE DEPARTMENT TO LEVY THE LATE FILING FEES U/S 234E OF THE I.T. ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 12,800/- RELEVANT TO 2 ND QUARTER- JULY 2015 TO SEPTEMBER 2015. ITA NO.- 2330/DEL/2017 R.R. ENTERPRISES PAGE 2 OF 8 THAT THE APPELLANT HAD DULY DEPOSITED THE TOTAL TD S WITH THE BANK AND THE LATE FILING OF RETURN WAS ONLY A PROCEDURAL IN NATU RE AND DID NOT RESULT INTO ANY LOSS OF REVENUE. THAT THE APPELLANT HAD A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE RETURN IN TIME AND NO FEE FOR LATE FILING DESERVES TO BE LEVIED. 2. THAT THE ORDERS OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES ARE NOT JUSTIFIED ON FACTS AND SAME ARE BAD IN LAW. 3. THAT THE ASSESSEE CRAVES THE RIGHT TO ADD, AMEND , DELETE OR SUBSTITUTED ANY GROUND OF APPEAL. [B] THE ASSESSING OFFICER (AO, FOR SHORT) ISSUED INT IMATION UNDER SECTION 200A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (I.T, FOR SHORT) DATED 2 2.12.2015, WHEREIN LATE FILING FEE AMOUNTING TO RS. 12,800/- WAS CHARGED UNDER SECTION 234E OF I.T. ACT. THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). VIDE IMPUGNED A PPELLATE ORDER DATED 31.01.2017, THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL. TH E RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER DATED 31.01.2017 OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS REPRODUCED AS UNDER : ITA NO.- 2330/DEL/2017 R.R. ENTERPRISES PAGE 3 OF 8 ITA NO.- 2330/DEL/2017 R.R. ENTERPRISES PAGE 4 OF 8 ITA NO.- 2330/DEL/2017 R.R. ENTERPRISES PAGE 5 OF 8 ITA NO.- 2330/DEL/2017 R.R. ENTERPRISES PAGE 6 OF 8 [C] THIS PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 31.01.2017 OF THE LD . CIT(A). AT THE TIME OF HEARING, REVENUE WAS REPRESENTED BY SHRI SURENDER PAL, THE L EARNED SENIOR DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE (LD. SR. DR, FOR SHORT). HOWEVER, NONE WAS PRESENT FROM THE ASSESSEES SIDE. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY REPRESENTA TION FROM ASSESSEES SIDE, AT THE TIME OF HEARING BEFORE US, WE HEARD THE LD. SR. DR; WHO RELIED UPON THE ORDER DATED 22.12.2015 OF INTIMATION UNDER SECTION 200A OF I.T. ACT AND THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.01.2017 OF THE LD. CIT(A). AFTER PE RUSAL OF THE MATERIALS ON RECORD, INCLUDING THE AFORESAID ORDER DATED 22.12.2015 AND IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 31.01.2017 OF THE LD. CIT(A), WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS PASSED SPEAKING ORDER ON MERITS. RELEVANT PORTION OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. C IT(A) HAS ALREADY BEEN REPRODUCED IN FOREGOING PARAGRAPH [B] OF THIS ORDER. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIV EN DETAILED ITA NO.- 2330/DEL/2017 R.R. ENTERPRISES PAGE 7 OF 8 REASONS FOR HIS DECISION ON MERITS IN THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 31.01.2017 OF LD. CIT(A). DURING APPELLATE PROCEED INGS IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (ITAT, FOR SHORT) NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN B ROUGHT FOR OUR CONSIDERATION TO PERSUADE US TO TAKE A VIEW DIFFERENT FROM THE VIEW TAKEN BY THE LD. CIT(A) IN THE IMPUGNED ORDER ON MERIT. AFTER HEARING THE LD. SR. DR AND AFTER PERUSAL OF MATERIALS ON RECORD, AND FURTHER, IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING DI SCUSSION, WE DECLINE TO INTERFERE WITH THE AFORESAID IMPUGNED APPELLATE ORDER DATED 31.01. 2017 OF LD. CIT(A), AND ACCORDINGLY, THIS APPEAL IS DISMISSED. [D] BEFORE WE PART; WE EXPLICITLY CLARIFY THAT THE ASSESSEE WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO APPROACH ITAT FOR RESTORATION OF THE APPEAL IN ACCO RDANCE WITH PROVISO TO RULE 24 OF INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL), RULES, 1963. IF THE ASSESSEE DOES APPROACH ITAT FOR RESTORATION OF THE APPEALS I N ITAT, THE MATTER WILL BE CONSIDERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES. [E] IN THE RESULT, APPEAL FILED BY ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 17 /12/2019. SD/- SD/- (AMIT SHUKLA) (ANADEE NATH MISSHRA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUN TANT MEMBER DATED: 17/12/2019 POOJA/- ITA NO.- 2330/DEL/2017 R.R. ENTERPRISES PAGE 8 OF 8 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(APPEALS) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI DATE OF DICTATION DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE THE OTHER MEMBER DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR. PS/PS DATE ON WHICH THE FINAL ORDER IS UPLOADED ON THE WEBSITE OF ITAT DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSISTANT REGISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER DATE OF DISPATCH OF THE ORDER