Case Law Details
ACIT Vs Parsons Brinckershoff India Pvt. Ltd (ITAT Delhi)
We find the JCIT in the instant case levied penalty of Rs.98,92,242/- u/s 271C on the ground that the assessee has not deducted TDS on certain expenses for which provision of Rs.9,92,66459/- was created in its books of account. We find the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty levied by the JCIT u/s 271C of the Act, the reasons of which have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraph. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. The assessee during the course of hearing of penalty proceedings before the JCIT had categorically mentioned that in absence of receipt of actual invoices as in the last day of respective financial years, the amount of provision for expenses were based on estimates. In the absence of invoices and consequential liability to make the payment, the assessee did not withhold taxes on the said yearend provision for expenses u/s 40(a)(i)/40(a)(ia) of the Act.
Since, the Ld. CIT(A) while cancelling the penalty levied u/s 271C has given justifiable reasons, therefore, in absence of any distinguishable features brought to our notice by the Ld. DR to take a contrary view than the view taken by the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue on the basis of facts available on record, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly the same is upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DEHLI
This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 30.11.2018 of the learned CIT(A)-41, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2013-14.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
