Case Law Details
KBR Infratch Ltd. Vs. Asst. CIT (Karnataka High Court)
We find from the order of tribunal that the finding recorded by the tribunal to arrive at a conclusion is based on sound appreciation of material available before it. In fact, a clear finding has been recorded by the tribunal that question of financial stringency pleaded by assessee was not proved. Even otherwise, it has been held that financial stringency would not justify the non-remittance of TDS to the Government, in as much as, it would amount to utilization of money payable to the appropriate government. As such, by extending its benevolence.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGEMENT
Assessee has preferred this appeal questioning the correctness and legality of the order dated 07.10.2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench ‘C’, Bangalore (for assessment year 2013-14) whereunder order passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Bangalore dated 14.08.2015 setting aside the levy of penalty of Rs.77,95,155/- came to be modified by restricting the quantum of penalty to Rs. taxguru.in 20,55,573/-
2. On 25.07.2013, a survey came to be conducted under Section 133A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’) in the business premises of assessee and an order under Section 201(1) of the Act came to be passed on 30.07.2013 enclosing therewith a demand notice. On 02.08.2013, assessee paid the amount demanded under the notice together with interest as required under Section 201 (1) (A) of the Act.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
