prpri S. 271FA Penalty justified for delayed filing of AIR return without reasonable explanation S. 271FA Penalty justified for delayed filing of AIR return without reasonable explanation

Case Law Details

Case Name : State of Rajasthan Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (CIB) (Rajasthan High Court)
Appeal Number : S.B. Civil Writ petition no. 5399 of 2011
Date of Judgement/Order : 13/07/2011
Related Assessment Year :


State of Rajasthan


Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (CIB)

S.B. Civil Writ petition no. 5399 of 2011
S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application no. 4896 of 2011

JULY 13, 2011


1. By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has beseeched to quash and set aside the order dated August 10, 2010, whereby the Director of Income-tax (CIB), Rajasthan, Jaipur, imposed a penalty of Rs. 20,200 on the petitioner.

2. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the impugned order, it is noticed that the respondent issued a notice to the petitioner under section 271FA on February 23, 2010, requiring him to attend his office on March 11, 2010, and show cause as to why the penalty under section 271FA should not have been imposed upon him for failure to file the annual information returns within the prescribed time. Pursuant to this notice, a letter was sent stating that annual returns had already been submitted, but on verification of the facts, it was found that the annual information returns was filed with a delay of 202 days. The explanation furnished by the Sub-Registrar in this regard was not found justifiable and, thus, it was not accepted. In the absence of any satisfactory explanation for late filing of the annual information return, the respondent imposed a penalty of Rs. 20,200 at the rate of Rs. 100 per day, during which the default continued.

3. I do not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned order. The said order is found to be just and in accordance with the provisions of section 271FA of Income-tax Act. No fundamental right or personal right of the petitioner is found to have been infringed. Otherwise too, the petitioner has got efficacious alternative legal remedy to challenge the said order, but the same is not found to have been filed by him. The petitioner cannot be permitted to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under article 227 of the Constitution of India and thus, the writ petition being totally bereft of any merit deserves to be dismissed in limine.

4. In view of the above, the writ petition fails and the same stands dismissed accordingly.

5. Consequent upon the dismissal of the writ petition, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and that also stands dismissed.

Download Judgment/Order

More Under Income Tax

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Posts by Date

July 2021