Selma Memoiral Trust, The Nilgiris V. JCIT, Coimbatore

ITA 2970/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5185 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 04-12-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: NITHYA SANKARAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! .#$#%, ' !( BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NOS.2969 & 2970/CHNY/2017 % *% / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 & 2008-09 M/S SELMA MEMORIAL TRUST, PROP OF RIVERSIDE PUBLIC SCHOOL, SAN-TRI-MOO, POST BOX NO.34, KOTAGIRI, NILGIRIST 643 217. PAN : AADTS 8376 E V. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS RANGE, COIMBATORE. (,-/ APPELLANT) (./,-/ RESPONDENT) ,- 0 1 / APPELLANT BY : SMT. NITHYA SANKARAN, CA ./,- 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT 2 0 3' / DATE OF HEARING : 07.06.2018 45* 0 3' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 11.06.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AG AINST THE RESPECTIVE ORDERS OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -2, COIMBATORE, DATED 31.08.2017, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YE ARS 2008-09 AND 2009-10, CONFIRMING THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE A SSESSING OFFICER 2 I.T.A. NOS.2969 & 2970/CHNY/17 UNDER SECTION 272A(2)(K) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 196 1 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2. SMT. NITHYA SANKARAN, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE-TRUST ESTABLI SHED AND ADMINISTERING A SCHOOL IN THE NAME OF M/S RIVERSIDE PUBLIC SCHOOL. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, OMISSION TO DE DUCT TAX AND FILING OF E-TDS RETURNS WERE NOT INTENTIONAL BUT IT WAS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPR ESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE DEDUCTED TAX FROM THE RENT PAYMENT AND ALS O SALARY PAYMENTS TO THE PRINCIPAL AT THE END OF THE FINANCI AL YEAR. TAX SO DEDUCTED WAS PAID TO THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT. HOWEV ER, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE H AS FILED TDS RETURNS IN THE LAST QUARTER OF THE YEAR AND THE INS PECTION WAS CARRIED ON AT THE PREMISES OF THE ASSESSEE ON 07.10.2013. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, AFTER VERIFYING THE RELEVAN T RECORDS, THERE WAS A DEMAND OF 60,529/- WHICH WAS ADMITTEDLY PAID BY THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE OMISSION TO FILE QUARTERLY RETURNS IS ONLY CIRCUMSTANTIAL AND NOT IN TENTIONAL. ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE H AD TO ENGAGE EXPERTISE FROM OUTSIDE FOR FILING THE E-RETURNS. S INCE THERE WAS NO 3 I.T.A. NOS.2969 & 2970/CHNY/17 EXPERIENCED PERSON FOR FILING E-TDS RETURN AT KOTAG IRI, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE ASSESSEE HAD TO ENGAGE PERSONS FROM COIMBATORE FOR FILING THE RETURNS. AFTER THE INSPE CTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THE RETURNS. 3. ON THE CONTRARY, SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THERE W AS A DELAY OF MORE THAN FIVE YEARS IN FILING THE RETURNS FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS, THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER LEVIED PENA LTY. PLACING RELIANCE ON THE JUDGMENT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH C OURT IN CENTRAL SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS ORGANISATION V. CIT (TDS), T HE LD. D.R. SUBMITTED THAT ON IDENTICAL CIRCUMSTANCES, THE HIGH COURT FOUND THAT THE PENALTY WAS RIGHTLY IMPOSED. A SIMILAR VIEW WA S ALSO TAKEN BY ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN RAJA HARPAL SINGH INTER COL LEGE V. PRINCIPAL CIT (2016) 386 ITR 327. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS ON EITH ER SIDE AND PERUSED THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD IT APPEARS THAT THE AS SESSEE DEDUCTED TAX FROM THE RENT PAID TO THE LANDLORD AND SALARY P AID TO THE PRINCIPAL. THE ASSESSEE ALSO CLAIMS THAT THE PAYME NTS WERE MADE TO THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNT. HOWEVER, E-TDS STATEMEN TS WERE NOT 4 I.T.A. NOS.2969 & 2970/CHNY/17 FILED WITHIN THE STIPULATED TIME. ADMITTEDLY, THER E WAS A DELAY OF FIVE YEARS IN FILING THE E-TDS STATEMENTS FOR BOTH THE A SSESSMENT YEARS. THE EXPLANATION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THERE WAS NO E XPERIENCED PERSON AT KOTAGIRI AND IT HAD TO ENGAGE SOMEBODY FR OM COIMBATORE FOR FILING OF RETURN APPEARS TO BE NOT A VALID REAS ON FOR NOT FILING THE TDS RETURNS. 5. WHEN THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO DEDUCT TAX AND FILE THE STATEMENT AS REQUIRED UNDER SECTION 206C(3) OF THE ACT WITHIN THE TIME PRESCRIBED UNDER SECTION 200(3) OF THE ACT, TH E ASSESSEE IS EXPECTED TO COMPLY WITH THE MANDATES OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT. KOTAGIRI IS NOT FAR AWAY FROM COIMBATORE. IT MAY N OT BE REQUIRED FOR THE ASSESSEE TO WAIT TILL AN INSPECTION WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE TDS WING OF THE DEPARTMENT. FROM THE VERY FACT THAT TH E FAILURE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING THE TDS WAS FOUND DURING TH E INSPECTION OF TDS WING OF THE DEPARTMENT, IT APPEARS THAT THE ASS ESSEE HAS NOT TAKEN ANY STEP FOR FILING THE RETURNS. UNDER SIMIL AR CIRCUMSTANCES, THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT HIGH COURT IN CENTR AL SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENTS ORGANISATION (SUPRA) HAS CONFIRMED THE PENALTY LEVIED. SINCE THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE ARE S IMILAR, THIS 5 I.T.A. NOS.2969 & 2970/CHNY/17 TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH T HE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUTHORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRM ED. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE STAND DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 11 TH JUNE, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! .#$#% ) ( . . . ) (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) (N.R.S. GANESAN) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 7 /DATED, THE 11 TH JUNE, 2018. KRI. 0 .389 :9*3 /COPY TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT 2. ./,- /RESPONDENT 3. 2 ;3 () /CIT(A)-2, COIMBATORE 4. 2 ;3 /CIT, TDS, COIMBATORE 5. 9< .3 /DR 6. =% > /GF.