Case Law Details
In the instant case, the ITO(TDS) while going through the quarterly return in Form No.26Q, filed by the assessee noted that it has omitted to quote PAN/had quoted invalid PAN in 196 cases. As regards the reasonable cause,it was pleaded on behalf of the assessee that TDS was deducted and deposited in time in government Treasury. The default is only with regard to the wrong quoting of PAN of 196 of the deductees, such deductees quoted wrong PAN. However, correct PAN was given as soon as default was brought to the notice of the assessee. In this case, the CIT(A) has categorically observed that the assessee deducted TDS correctly and revised PAN and filed the revised statement on form No.26G, hence there was sufficient compliance of the provisions of section 139A. There is no dispute that the assessee quoted invalid PAN for 196 deductees which was corrected on being pointed out by ITO(TDS). In the instant case, failure to quote right PAN has occurred as the concerned depositor had misquoted PAN. There is also no dispute that the PAN was corrected after ascertaining the same from the respective deductees.
It was further held that cumulative analysis of Section 139A and Rules 114B to 114D shows that an obligation to quote PAN/GIR number or to file Form No.60 is that of customer and not that of the bank. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the present case, and also keeping in view the decision of ITAT, Ahmedabad “D” Bench in the case of Financial Cooperative Bank Limited v. ITO, Ward 2(3), Surat (supra), we hold that there was reasonable cause of the default,if any committed by the assessee and hence no penalty under section 273B of the Act is leviable.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ITA No. 124 of 2012
Date of decision: 07.08.2012
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
