District Public Relation Officer, Faridabad V. JCIT, Gurgaon

ITA 2370/DEL/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7402 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-08-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 18-08-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 17-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : B : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM & SHRI N.K. CHOUDHRY, JM ITA NO.2370 & 2371/DEL/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 & 2011-12 DISTRICT PUBLIC RELATION OFFICER, C/O M.K. DUDEJA, ADVOCATE, 3G/162, NIT, FARIDABAD. TAN: RTKD03794A VS. JCIT, TDS RANGE, GURGAON. ASSESSEE BY : SHRI M.K. DUDEJA, ADVOCATE DEPTT. BY : SHRI ANIL KUMAR SHARMA, SR. DR DATE OF HEARING : 18.08.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.08.2016 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, AM: THESE TWO APPEALS BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAI NST THE SEPARATE ORDERS PASSED BY THE CIT(A) ON 30.03.2012 CONFIRMING PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE IN COME-TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER ALSO CALLED THE ACT) IN RE LATION TO THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2010-11 AND 2011-12. SINCE BOTH T HE APPEALS ITA NO.2370 & 2371/DEL/2014 2 ARE BASED ON SIMILAR FACTS AND IDENTICAL GROUNDS, W E ARE, THEREFORE, PROCEEDING TO DISPOSE THEM OFF BY THIS C ONSOLIDATED ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11 . 2. THE ONLY ISSUE IS AGAINST THE CONFIRMATION OF PE NALTY AMOUNTING TO RS.42,300/- IMPOSED AND CONFIRMED U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT. 3. BRIEFLY STATED, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO FILE E-TDS RETURN IN FORM NO.24Q AN D 26Q IN RESPECT OF DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE FOR THE FOUR QUARTERS FALLING IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE ASSESS MENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSE SSEE FILED ITS RETURN IN FORM NO.24Q/26Q LATE AS PER THE FOLLO WING DETAILS:- S.NO. QTR. DATE OF FILING DELAY IN DAYS TDS LIABILITY 1. Q-3 13.06.2011 363 85709 2. Q-4 13.06.2011 514 6000 ITA NO.2370 & 2371/DEL/2014 3 4. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED REASONS FOR DELAY IN FILI NG E-TDS RETURNS. NOT CONVINCED, THE AO IMPOSED PENALTY AMO UNTING TO RS.42,300/- FOR DEFAULT IN LATE FILING OF E-TDS RET URNS. SUCH PENALTY CAME TO BE AFFIRMED IN THE FIRST APPEAL. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERU SING THE RELEVANT MATERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT TH E ASSESSEE IS A GOVERNMENT OFFICE. TDS ON SALARY OF EMPLOYEES WAS D EDUCTED IN TIME AND ALSO PROMPTLY PAID ON THE SAME DAY. RE TURNS OF THE TDS WERE FILED BY THE BILL CLERK BY POST IN TIM E. LATER ON, WHEN THE INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT REQUIRED THE ASSESSE E TO FILE SUCH RETURNS ONLINE, THE ASSESSEE FILED SUCH RETURN S ACCORDINGLY. THUS, IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE DEFAULT IS ONLY IN LATE E-FILING OF THE TDS RETURNS. NOT ONLY THE TAX WAS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE AND PAID IN TIME TO THE EXCHEQUER, THE AS SESSEE ALSO FILED TDS RETURNS IN TIME MANUALLY EVEN IN RESPECT OF THE QUARTERS FOR WHICH THE PENALTY HAS BEEN IMPOSED. C OPIES OF ITA NO.2370 & 2371/DEL/2014 4 SUCH MANUALLY FILED TDS RETURNS ARE AVAILABLE AT PA GES 5 AND 6 OF THE PAPER BOOK. 6. SECTION 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT IMPOSING PENALTY F OR DEFAULT IN DELIVERING A COPY OF THE STATEMENT WITHI N THE SPECIFIED TIME AS GIVEN U/S 200(3) IS SUBJECT TO SE CTION 273B. LATER PROVISION PROVIDES THAT IF THERE IS A REASONA BLE CAUSE FOR NOT COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 272A(2 )(K), NO PENALTY WOULD BE IMPOSED. ADVERTING TO THE FACTS O F THE INSTANT CASE, WE FIND THAT THE WORK OF FILING TDS R ETURNS WAS BEING DONE BY A CLERK, WHO GOT TRANSFERRED. EVEN O THERWISE, THERE IS NO WILLFUL INTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE IN LA TE FILING OF THE RETURNS BECAUSE SUCH RETURNS WERE MANUALLY FILED IN TIME THOUGH THE DEFAULT IS ONLY FOR THE DELAY IN E-FILIN G OF THE TDS RETURNS. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, THE ASSESSEE HA S MADE OUT A CASE OF A REASONABLE CAUSE IN NOT COMPLYING WITH TH E PROVISIONS OF THE ACT, WHOSE VIOLATION ATTRACTS PEN ALTY U/S ITA NO.2370 & 2371/DEL/2014 5 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT. WE, THEREFORE, ORDER TO DEL ETE THE PENALTY CONFIRMED IN THE FIRST APPEAL. ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 . 7. BOTH THE SIDES ARE IN AGREEMENT THAT THE FACTS A ND CIRCUMSTANCES FOR THE INSTANT YEAR ARE MUTATIS MUTANDIS SIMILAR TO THOSE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. FOR THIS YEAR, THERE WAS A DEFAULT IN FILING OF E-TDS RETURNS FOR THREE QUARTERS, WHICH WERE ADMITTEDLY FILED MANUALLY IN TIME, WHOSE COPIES ARE AVAILABLE ON PAGES 5 AND 8 OF THE PAPER BOOK. I N VIEW OF THE SIMILARITY OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES FOR T HIS YEAR WITH THE EARLIER YEAR, FOLLOWING THE VIEW TAKEN HEREINAB OVE FOR THE SAID EARLIER YEAR, WE ORDER FOR THE DELETION OF EXT ANT PENALTY FOR THIS YEAR AS WELL. ITA NO.2370 & 2371/DEL/2014 6 8. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18.08.2016. SD/- SD/- [N.K. CHOUDHRY] [R.S. SYAL] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED, 18 TH AUGUST, 2016. DK COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.