Case Law Details
BCCI Vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)
The provisions of Section 272A(2)(k) are subject to provisions of Section 273B of the 1961 Act and the cause shown by the assessee as outlined above in the instant case before us is a reasonable cause. It is undisputed that the income-tax so deducted at source by the assessee on the salaries paid to employees was deposited in time to the credit of Central Government . The statement of income-tax deducted at source i.e. quarterly TDS return in form no. 24Q for all the four quarters of the financial year 2010-11 were filed late beyond time stipulated under law. We are fully aware that Hon’ble High Court’s have upheld the constitutional validity of late fee as prescribed u/s. 234E of the Act for delay in filing of TDS returns as it is a fee paid to Revenue for extra work been done in giving credit to those tax-payers who suffers because of non filing of TDS returns by the deductors in time. At the same time, we cannot also ignore the fact that it was for the Revenue to have allowed smooth switchover from manual to e-filing system of filing TDS returns. The onus and burden was on revenue to provide necessary infrastructure so that tax-payer did not face any inconvenience in filing e-TDS returns. But as it is emerging from the historical factual matrix, the public at large faced lot of inconvenience in initial stage of switchover from manual to e- filing system of TDS returns due to several glitches as cited in preceding para’s of this order. We have also noted the conduct of the assessee for subsequent periods wherein the TDS returns were e-filed in form no. 24Q, 26Q as well 27Q by the assessee mostly in time for financial year 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15.
The assessee has also enclosed acknowledgement copy of TDS returns filed for the aforesaid three financial years from 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 which are placed in paper book filed with the tribunal / page no. 11 to 46. The Ld DR did not controvert the above filing of TDS returns in form no. 24Q, 26Q and 27Q for financial year 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 wherein TDS returns were mostly filed in time as could be evidenced from the above chart. Thus, based on our above discussions outlined in details and conduct of the assessee keeping in view income-tax deducted at source were deposited in time and only filing of the TDS return was delayed in the initial years of switchover from manual system to e-filing of quarterly TDS returns, thus, we are of the considered view that the penalty of Rs. 46,200/- as is levied by AO and as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 272A(2)(k) in the instant case is not sustainable in the eyes of law as the assessee has shown a reasonable cause falling within parameters of Section 273B of the 1961 Act and we hereby order deletion of the penalty of Rs. 46,200/- levied by the AO u/s 272A(2)(k) of the 1961 Act as was confirmed by learned CIT(A) by setting aside the orders of the authorities below.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
This appeal, filed by assessee, being ITA No. 1999/Mum/2017, is directed against appellate order date 10.01.2017 passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-60, Mumbai (hereinafter called “the CIT(A)”), for assessment year 2011-12, the appellate proceedings had arisen before learned CIT(A) from penalty order dated 16.12.2011 passed by learned Assessing Officer (hereinafter called “the AO”) u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called “the Act”) for AY 2011-12.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
