Bank of Baroda, Ambala V. ITO (TDS), Panchkula

ITA 6/CHANDI/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 621514 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: JAI SHREE SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: HARMAD KHANDUJA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Revised return
• Section: 139; 273B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES B CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. SUSHMA CHOWLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MEHAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 6/CHD/2012 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07 BANK OF BARODA VS THE ITO (TDS), JAGADHARI ROAD, PANCHKULA AMBALA PAN NO. RTKB02121A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI HARMAD KHANDUJA RESPONDENT BY : SMT. JAISHREE SHARMA DATE OF HEARING : 09.02.2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.0.2012 ORDER PER SUSHMA CHOWLA, JM THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), ROHTAK 18.11.2011 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AGAI NST THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 272B OF THE I.T. ACT, 1961. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED VARIOUS GROUNDS OF APPEA L BUT THE ONLY ISSUE RAISED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS AGAINST THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 272B OF THE ACT AMOUNTING TO RS. 80,000/-. 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION HAD FILED ITS TDS QUARTERLY STATEMENT FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2 2005-06 IN FORM NO. 26Q ON 31.8.2005. . THE ASSESSI NG OFFICER ON THE SCRUTINY OF THE SAID E-TDS RETURNS NOTED THAT THE P AN NUMBERS OF EIGHT DEDUCTEES WERE FOUND TO BE INVALID. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ISSUED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE TO THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, AS NO RESPON SE WAS RECEIVED FROM THE ASSESSEE, THE PENALTY U/S 272B OF THE ACT WAS L EVIED AT RS. 80,000/-. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT IT HAD FILED ITS QUARTERLY TDS RETURN FOR THE FIRST TIME AND COULD NOT UNDERSTAND THE MECHANISM OF CORRECTING THE INFORMAT ION IN THE SAID E-TDS RETURN. FURTHER, PLEA RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WAS T HAT THE DELAY IN FILING THE CORRECTION STATEMENT WAS ON ACCOUNT OF HEAVY FLOODS BECAUSE OF RAINS DUE TO WHICH COMPUTERS / TDS RETURNS WERE DAMAGED, RESU LTING IN DELAY IN FILING THE SAID DETAILS. THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 272B OF THE ACT. 4. THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE POINTED OUT THAT TH IS WAS THE FIRST YEAR OF E-FILING OF THE TDS RETURNS BY THE ASSESSEE AND IN THE QUARTER RETURN FILED ON 31.8.2005, INFORMATION OF ABOUT 56 DEDUCTEES W AS FURNISHED AND ONLY IN RESPECT OF 8 DEDUCTEES, INCORRECT PAN NUMBERS WE RE FILED. THE CORRECT PAN NUMBERS WERE AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND DE SPITE ITS EFFORTS, THE REVISED RETURNS WAS NOT BEING ACCEPTED ON THE COMPU TER SYSTEM. IN RESPECT OF THE NON FURNISHING OF INFORMATION BEFORE THE ASS ESSING OFFICER DURING PENALTY PROCEEDINGS, IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LD. AR FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT IN JULY, 2010, THERE WERE HEAVY FLOODS IN AMBALA CI TY BECAUSE OF WHICH THE WHOLE RECORDS OF THE BANK WERE DAMAGED AND EVEN THE N THE CORRECT PAN NUMBERS WERE FILED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. T HE LD. AR FURTHER POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE CORRECT ION STATEMENT ON 22.10.2011 AND FURTHER PRAYER WAS MADE THAT IN THE ABOVE SAID 3 CIRCUMSTANCES, THERE IS NO MERIT IN THE LEVY OF PEN ALTY U/S 272 B OF THE ACT. THE LD. DR FOR THE REVENUE RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. PENALTY U/S 272B OF THE ACT IS LEVIABLE IN ALL SUCH CASES W HERE THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 139 A(2) OF THE ACT. IN THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAD E-FILED ITS QUARTERLY TDS RETURN FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2005-06 ON 31.8.2005. IN T HE SAID TDS RETURN, IT HAS REFLECTED INFORMATION IN RESPECT OF CERTAIN DEDUCTE ES. HOWEVER, PAN NUMBERS OF EIGHT DEDUCTEES FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSE E WERE FOUND TO BE INCORRECT. THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO FURNISH THE REQU ISITE INFORMATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HOWEVER, CORRECT PAN NUMBER S WERE LATER AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED REVISE D COMPUTATION ON 22.10.2011. IN THE ABOVE SAID FACTS AND CIRCUMSTAN CES OF THE CASE, WE ARE OF THE VIEW, THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT EXIGIBLE TO L EVY OF PENALTY U/S 272B OF THE ACT. FURTHER, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 273B OF THE ACT, PENALTY IS NOT TO BE IMPOSED IN CASES WHERE THE ASSESSEE HA S ESTABLISHED THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE FAILURE REFERRED TO IN THE RESPECTIVE SECTIONS LEVYING PENALTY UNDER THE ACT. IN THE TOTALITY OF F ACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSEE HAD A BONAFIDE CAUSE FOR NOT FILING THE ABOVE SAID INFORMATION BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHICH THOU GH WAS AVAILABLE WITH THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVISED COMPUTATION HAS ALSO B EEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER WHICH COMPLETE INFORMATION OF PAN NU MBERS OF DEDUCTEES HAVE BEEN FURNISHED. ACCORDINGLY, WE HOLD THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS BONAFIDE AND THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR N OT COMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT IN TIME. THE ASSESSEE UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS NOT EXIGIBLE TO LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 272B OF THE ACT AND ACCORDINGLY WE 4 DIRECT THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE PENALTY LEVIED U/S 272B OF THE ACT. 6. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE THUS ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 17 TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2012. SD/- SD/- (MEHAR SINGH) (SUSHMA CHOWLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED : 17 TH FEBRUARY, 2012 RKK COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR