Star Quenchers Spirit P.Ltd, Aurangabad V. Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, TDS Range, Nashik

ITA 2899/PUN/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 109 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6966 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 1 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-01-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 19-01-2021
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 06-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Non-deduction of tax; Reasonable cause; TDS
• Section: 274; 208; 192; 272A; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, PUNE (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM . / ITA NO.2899/PUN/2017 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13 STAR QUENCHERS SPIRIT P. LTD., FLAT NO.5, SUKHKARTA APARTMENT, GARKHEDA, AURANGABAD-431001. PAN : AANCS2939J ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. JT. CIT, TDS RANGE, NASHIK. / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. N. PURANIK REVENUE BY : SHRI SUDHENDU DAS / DATE OF HEARING : 19.01.2021 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 20.01.2021 / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)- 1, AURANGABAD (THE CIT(A) FOR SHORT) DATED 24.10.2017 CONFIRMED THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT FOR SHORT) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT DURING THE COURSE OF VERIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE OF TDS PROVISION DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2011-12, THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS RANGE, NASHIK FOUND THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NOT PREPARED OR DELIVERED OR CAUSE TO BE DELIVERED TO THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY TO QUARTERLY SUBMISSION OF PRESCRIBED RETURN U/S 200(3) OF THE ACT AS PRESCRIBED U/S 31A OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (THE RULES FOR SHORT). 2 ITA NO.2899/PUN/2017 ACCORDINGLY, A SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE U/S 272A(2)(K) R.W.S. 274 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT ON 12.12.2013. IT WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE FOLLOWING RETURNS WERE FILED BELATEDLY :- RRR NO. FORM NO. PERIODICITY DUE DATE DATE OF FILING DELAY(DAYS) 31010100247615 26Q Q1 15-JUL-11 22-AUG-12 404 31010100247626 26Q Q2 15-OCT-11 22-AUG-12 312 31010100247630 26Q Q3 15-JAN-12 22-AUG-12 220 31010100247641 26Q Q4 15-MAY-12 22-AUG-12 99 21000100277413 27EQ Q1 15-JUL-11 10-AUG-12 392 21000100277424 27EQ Q2 15-OCT-11 10-AUG-12 300 21000100277435 27EQ Q3 15-JAN-12 10-AUG-12 208 21000100277446 27EQ Q4 15-MAY-12 10-AUG-12 87 3. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPELLANT WAS CALLED UPON TO SHOW-CAUSE WHY PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED. IN RESPONSE TO THE SAID SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE, IT IS SUBMITTED THAT THE DELAY IN PREPARATION AND DELIVERY TO THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITIES IF THE PRESCRIBED FORM IS CAUSED ON ACCOUNT OF NON-AVAILABILITY OF THE DETAILS SUCH AS PAN, ADDRESS FURTHER VALID TEE OF CHALLANS PAID, GENERATION OF CSI FILE ETC.. THE TDS AUTHORITIES NOT BEING SATISFIED BY THE SAID EXPLANATION HAD LEVIED A PENALTY OF RS.1,08,600/- BY HOLDING THAT IT IS NOT MERE TECHNICAL BREACH OF LAW VIDE ORDER DATED 09.05.2014. 4. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE LEVY OF ABOVE PENALTY, AN APPEAL WAS PREFERRED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) CONTENDING THAT THE PENALTY SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED FROM THE DATE OF DEDUCTION OF TDS BUT FROM THE DATE OF REMITTANCE OF TDS AMOUNT TO THE CREDIT OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT. IT IS FURTHER CONTENDED THAT NO REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY WAS GIVEN BY THE TDS AUTHORITIES AND SINCE THERE WAS 3 ITA NO.2899/PUN/2017 NO LOSS OF REVENUE AND DELAY IN PREPARATION AND DELIVERY OF THE PRESCRIBED RETURNS IS NOT INTENTIONAL, IT IS MERE OF TECHNICAL BREACH OF LAW. THUS, IT WAS ARGUED THAT THE PENALTY SHOULD BE DELETED. HOWEVER, NO PERSONAL APPEARANCE WAS MADE BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A), THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER GRANTING OF FOUR OPPORTUNITIES HAD PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE THE MATTER AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL BY HOLDING THAT THERE WAS NO REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE DELAY IN PREPARATION AND DELIVERY OF THE PRESCRIBED RETURNS TO THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITIES AND ACCORDINGLY CONFIRMED THE PENALTY. 5. BEING AGGRIEVED BY THE ABOVE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A), THE APPELLANT IS BEFORE US IN THE PRESENT APPEAL. 6. BEFORE US, THE LD. AR FOR THE APPELLANT CONTENDED THAT THE PENALTY CAN BE LEVIED ONLY IN RESPECT OF THE DELAY FROM THE DATE OF PAYMENT OF TDS NOT FROM THE DATE OF DEDUCTION OF THE TDS. 7. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD. CIT-DR FILED A LETTER FROM THE INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AURANGABAD DATED 14.12.2020 WHEREIN THE TDS AUTHORITIES HAD CONFIRMED THE DELAY IN THE PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF THE PRESCRIBED RETURNS TO THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITIES IS ONLY AS FOLLOWS :- RRR NO. FORM NO. PERIODICITY DUE DATE DATE OF PAYMENT OF TDS DATE OF FILING DELAY (NO. OF DAYS) 31010100247615 26Q Q1 15.07.2011 01.08.2012 22.08.2012 22 31010100247626 26Q Q2 15.10.2011 01.08.2012 22.08.2012 22 31010100247630 26Q Q3 15.01.2012 01.08.2012 22.08.2012 22 31010100247641 26Q Q4 15.05.2012 01.08.2012 22.08.2012 22 21000100277413 27EQ Q1 15.07.2011 * 10.08.2012 21000100277424 27EQ Q2 15.10.2011 * 10.08.2012 21000100277435 27EQ Q3 15.01.2012 * 10.08.2012 4 ITA NO.2899/PUN/2017 21000100277446 27EQ Q4 15.05.2012 * 10.08.2012 8. WE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL RELATES TO THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT. THE PROVISIONS OF CLAUSE (K) OF SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 272A PROVIDES THAT A PENALTY OF ONE HUNDRED RUPEE FOR EVERY DAY SHALL BE LEVIED IN CASE THE ASSESSEE FAILS TO DELIVER OR CAUSE TO BE DELIVERED A COPY OF THE STATEMENT WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR THE PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 206C OF THE ACT. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE FAILURE ENVISAGED UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE ACT. FOR BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THE ISSUE ON HAND, IT IS RELEVANT TO EXTRACT THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (1) AND SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE ACT, WHICH READ AS UNDER :- DUTY OF PERSON DEDUCTING TAX. 200. (1) ANY PERSON DEDUCTING ANY SUM IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER SHALL PAY WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME, THE SUM SO DEDUCTED TO THE CREDIT OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OR AS THE BOARD DIRECTS. (3) ANY PERSON DEDUCTING ANY SUM ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL, 2005 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FOREGOING PROVISIONS OF THIS CHAPTER OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, ANY PERSON BEING AN EMPLOYER REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (1A) OF SECTION 192 SHALL, AFTER PAYING THE TAX DEDUCTED TO THE CREDIT OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME, PREPARE SUCH STATEMENTS FOR SUCH PERIOD AS MAY BE PRESCRIBED AND DELIVER OR CAUSE TO BE DELIVERED TO THE PRESCRIBED INCOME-TAX AUTHORITY OR THE PERSON AUTHORISED 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: PROVIDED THAT THE PERSON MAY ALSO DELIVER TO THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY A CORRECTION STATEMENT FOR RECTIFICATION OF ANY MISTAKE OR TO ADD, DELETE OR UPDATE THE INFORMATION FURNISHED IN THE STATEMENT DELIVERED UNDER THIS SUB-SECTION IN SUCH FORM AND VERIFIED IN SUCH MANNER AS MAY BE SPECIFIED BY THE AUTHORITY. 9. THEREFORE, THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE ACT MANDATES THAT A PERSON WHO DEDUCTED THE TAX AT SOURCE UNDER CHAPTER XVII OF THE ACT AFTER PAYING THE TAX DEDUCTED TO THE CREDIT OF THE CENTRAL 5 ITA NO.2899/PUN/2017 GOVERNMENT WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME SHALL ALSO PREPARE AND DELIVER OR CAUSE TO BE DELIVERED TO THE PRESCRIBED AUTHORITIES, THE STATEMENT PRESCRIBED IN THE PRESCRIBED FORM, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS ENTAILS THE PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT, WHICH READS AS UNDER :- PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, SIGN STATEMENTS, FURNISH INFORMATION, RETURNS OR STATEMENTS, ALLOW INSPECTIONS, ETC. 272A. (1) . (2) IF ANY PERSON FAILS . (K) TO DELIVER OR CAUSE TO BE DELIVERED A COPY OF THE STATEMENT WITHIN THE TIME SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR THE PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 206C; . HE SHALL PAY, BY WAY OF PENALTY, A SUM OF ONE HUNDRED RUPEES FOR EVERY DAY DURING WHICH THE FAILURE CONTINUES: PROVIDED THAT THE AMOUNT OF PENALTY FOR FAILURES IN RELATION TO A DECLARATION MENTIONED IN SECTION 197A, A CERTIFICATE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 203 AND RETURNS UNDER SECTIONS 206 AND 206C AND STATEMENTS UNDER SUB-SECTION (2A) OR SUB- SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR THE PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (3) OR UNDER SUB-SECTION (3A) OF SECTION 206C SHALL NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF TAX DEDUCTIBLE OR COLLECTIBLE, AS THE CASE MAY BE: PROVIDED FURTHER THAT NO PENALTY SHALL BE LEVIED UNDER THIS SECTION FOR THE FAILURE REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (K), IF SUCH FAILURE RELATES TO A STATEMENT REFERRED TO IN SUB- SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OR THE PROVISO TO SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 206C WHICH IS TO BE DELIVERED OR CAUSED TO BE DELIVERED FOR TAX DEDUCTED AT SOURCE OR TAX COLLECTED AT SOURCE, AS THE CASE MAY BE, ON OR AFTER THE 1ST DAY OF JULY, 2012. 10. IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE DELAY IN PREPARATION AND FILING THE PRESCRIBED RETURNS IS ONLY IN FOUR CASES WHERE THE TAX WAS PAID TO THE CREDIT OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ON 01.08.2012 AND THE PRESCRIBED RETURNS WERE FILED ON 22.08.2012. THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-RULE (2) OF RULE 31A OF THE RULES PRESCRIBED THAT THE STATEMENT OF DEDUCTION OF TAX SHALL BE FURNISHED BY LAST DAY OF SUCCEEDING MONTH OF PRECEDING QUARTER. FOR BETTER UNDERSTANDING, THE RELEVANT RULES ARE EXTRACTED AS UNDER :- [STATEMENT OF DEDUCTION OF TAX UNDER SUB-SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200. 31A. (1) .. 6 ITA NO.2899/PUN/2017 [(2) STATEMENTS REFERRED TO IN SUB-RULE (1) FOR THE QUARTER OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR ENDING WITH THE DATE SPECIFIED IN COLUMN (2) OF THE TABLE BELOW SHALL BE FURNISHED BY THE DUE DATE SPECIFIED IN THE CORRESPONDING ENTRY IN COLUMN (3) OF THE SAID TABLE: TABLE SL. NO. DATE OF ENDING OF QUARTER OF FINANCIAL YEAR DUE DATE (1) (2) (3) 1. 30TH JUNE 31 ST JULY OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2. 30TH SEPTEMBER 31 ST OCTOBER OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 3. 31ST DECEMBER 31 ST JANUARY OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR 4. 31ST MARCH 31 ST MAY OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE FINANCIAL YEAR IN WHICH THE DEDUCTION IS MADE] 11. THUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT THERE IS NO DELAY IN SUBMISSION AND FILING OF THE PRESCRIBED RETURNS FROM THE DATE OF TDS AMOUNT CREDITED TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT. THE APPROACH OF THE LOWER AUTHORITIES IN COMPUTING THE PERIOD OF DEFAULT FROM THE DATE OF DEDUCTION OF TAX AT SOURCE INSTEAD OF DATE OF PAYMENT OF TDS AMOUNT CREDITED TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT IS UNREASONABLE AND CONTRARY TO THE PLAIN PROVISIONS OF THE RELEVANT RULES. IN OTHER WORDS, IN CASE WHERE TAX AMOUNT HAS NOT BEEN REMITTED TO THE CREDIT OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT, THE QUESTION OF ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF TAX DEDUCTION AT SOURCE U/S 200(3) OF THE ACT OR FILING THE RETURN UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SUB- SECTION (3) OF SECTION 200 OF THE ACT WOULD NOT ARISE AT ALL. THAT BEING THE CASE THE QUESTION OF IMPOSING PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF THE ABOVE SAID PROVISIONS WOULD ALSO NOT ARISE. FURTHER, THE PROVISIONS OF INCOME TAX ACT PRESCRIBE DIFFERENT PENALTIES FOR NON-DEDUCTION AS WELL AS THE DELAY IN REMITTANCE OF THE AMOUNT TO THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT. IT IS TRITE LAW THAT THE TWO DIFFERENT PENALTIES CANNOT BE IMPOSED BY THE PARLIAMENT FOR THE SAME OFFENCE. IN THIS CASE, WE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SRI RAM MEMORIAL EDUCATION 7 ITA NO.2899/PUN/2017 PROMOTION SOCIETY, 150 TAXMAN 58 WHEREIN THE HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT HELD AS UNDER :- 12. A BARE PERUSAL OF THE AFORESAID PROVISION WOULD REVEAL THAT THE SAID SECTIONS, NAMELY, SS. 203 AND 206 WOULD COME INTO OPERATION WHEN THE TAX IS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE BY THE PERSONS WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR DEDUCTING THE TAX AT SOURCE. THE VERY OPENING WORDS OF S. 203, VIZ., 'EVERY PERSON DEDUCTING TAX IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SS. 192 TO 194....' MAKE IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR, THAT THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN, WOULD ONLY BE ATTRACTED, IF THE TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. IN CASE THE TAX IS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE, RESPONSIBILITY LIES UPON THE PERSON DEDUCTING THE TAX IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE TO THE EFFECT THAT TAX HAS BEEN PAID IN THE MANNER PRESCRIBED IN S. 203 AND IF THERE IS A VIOLATION ON THE PART OF THE SAID PERSON IN ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE TO THE EFFECT THAT TAX HAS BEEN DEDUCTED WITHIN THE GIVEN PERIOD OR FOR VIOLATION OF ANY OTHER SPECIFIC CONDITIONS PRESCRIBED THEREIN, HE WOULD RENDER HIMSELF OPEN FOR IMPOSITION OF PENALTY FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS OF S. 203. 13. LIKEWISE UNDER S. 206, IF THE TAX IS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE, THE PRESCRIBED PERSON WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DEDUCTING THE TAX, HAS TO FURNISH THE PRESCRIBED RETURNS TO THE PRESCRIBED IT AUTHORITY WITHIN THE PRESCRIBED TIME AND FAILURE IN DOING SO OR NON-COMPLIANCE OF ANY OTHER CONDITIONS OF THE PROVISIONS OF S. 206 WOULD ATTRACT THE PENAL PROVISIONS OF IMPOSITION OF PENALTY. 14. SEC. 206 HAS THE HEADING PERSONS DEDUCTING TAX TO FURNISH PRESCRIBED RETURNS, WHICH MEANS THAT THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN ARE APPLICABLE TO THE PERSONS MAKING DEDUCTION OF THE TAX. THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR DEDUCTING TAX WOULD CONSEQUENTLY MEAN THE PERSON WHO HAS ACTUALLY DEDUCTED THE TAX. THE SAID PROVISION, THEREFORE, CANNOT BE MADE APPLICABLE IN A CASE WHERE THE TAX HAS NOT BEEN DEDUCTED AT SOURCE. 15. THE AFORESAID TWO PROVISIONS, THUS, WOULD BECOME APPLICABLE ONLY IF THE TAX IS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE BY THE PERSON CONCERNED AND HE COMMITS DEFAULT IN COMPLYING WITH ANY OF THE PROVISIONS OF S. 203 OR S. 206 BUT IN CASE NO TAX IS DEDUCTED AT SOURCE, THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS WOULD NOT BE ATTRACTED. 16. FOR FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE IN DEDUCTING THE TAX AT SOURCE, PENALTY CAN BE IMPOSED UPON HIM UNDER S. 271C OF THE ACT. 17. SEC. 271C, WHICH READS AS UNDER, PRESCRIBES A PENALTY EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT OF TAX, WHICH THE PERSON CONCERNED FAILED TO DEDUCT OR PAY. '271C. PENALTY FOR FAILURE TO DEDUCT TAX AT SOURCE.(1) IF ANY PERSON FAILS TO (A) DEDUCT THE WHOLE OR ANY PART OF THE TAX AS REQUIRED BY OR UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER XVII-B; OR (B) PAY THE WHOLE OR ANY PART OF THE TAX AS REQUIRED BY OR UNDER, (I) SUB-S. (2) OF S. 115-O; OR (II) THE SECOND PROVISO TO S. 194B, THEN, SUCH PERSON SHALL BE LIABLE TO PAY, BY WAY OF PENALTY, A SUM EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT OF TAX WHICH SUCH PERSON FAILED TO DEDUCT OR PAY AS AFORESAID. 8 ITA NO.2899/PUN/2017 (2) ANY PENALTY IMPOSABLE UNDER SUB-S. (1) SHALL BE IMPOSED BY THE JT. CIT.' 18. ONCE A PERSON PRESCRIBED OR CONCERNED OR THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO A PENALTY UNDER S. 271C, FOR NOT DEDUCTING THE TAX AT SOURCE, THERE WOULD NOT ARISE ANY OCCASION FOR LEVYING A PENALTY UNDER SS. 272A(2)(C) AND 272A(2)(G) FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OF THE PROVISIONS OF SS. 203 AND 206. IN OTHER WORDS, IN CASE THE TAX HAS NOT BEEN DEDUCTED AT SOURCE, THE QUESTION OF ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE OF TAX UNDER S. 203 OR THAT OF FILING OF RETURN UNDER S. 206 WOULD NOT ARISE AT ALL. THAT BEING SO, THE QUESTION OF IMPOSING PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF THE AFORESAID PROVISIONS, WOULD ALSO NOT ARISE. 12. THUS, HAVING REGARD TO THE LEGAL POSITION, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 272A(2)(K) OF THE ACT IS NOT JUSTIFIED IN THE PRESENT FACTS OF THE CASE. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET-ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND DIRECTED TO DELETE THE PENALTY. 13. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 20 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021. SD/- SD/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 20 TH JANUARY, 2021. SUJEET / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A)-1, AURANGABAD. 4. THE CIT-TDS, PUNE. 5 . , , , / DR, ITAT, B BENCH, PUNE. 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY , / ITAT, PUNE.