Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal upholds CIT(A) decision on penalty deletion under IT Act section 271C for tax deduction failure</h1> <h3>The DCIT Versus Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd</h3> The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals and upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete penalties under section 271C of the IT Act for three assessment ... Penalty u/s.271C - non deduction of tds - Held that:- As per the provisions of Section 273B no penalty u/s.273C shall be imposable in case of failure referred in the said provisions if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure. In the present case, the employer company has relied upon the provisions of Section 17(2) r.w.s 192 of the IT Act for the purpose that food allowance per meal ₹ 15 per day is exempted from tax and that employees were placed on remote areas; hence, not chargeable to tax. The assessee has pleaded that under bona fide belief it was decided that reimbursement of “canteen subsidy scheme” was not subject to TDS. We have noted that in the case of Muthoot Bankers, [2011 (9) TMI 638 - ITAT COCHIN ], it was held that no penalty is leviable if there is a bona fide omission in not deducting the tax at source. We have also examined the case laws as indicated by learned Sr.D.R. but considering the facts and circumstances of the case, those case laws are distinguishable on fact and law; hence, not helpful to the Revenue Department. Resultantly, we hereby affirm the view taken by learned CIT(A) and dismiss the ground of the Revenue. - Decided in favour of assessee Issues:- Penalty under section 271C of the IT Act for three assessment years- Whether penalty was rightly deleted by the CIT(A)- Reasonable cause for failure to deduct tax at source on reimbursement of food expenses- Applicability of Section 273B in the penalty impositionAnalysis:1. Penalty under section 271C: The appeals were filed by the Revenue challenging the deletion of penalties under section 271C of the IT Act for three assessment years. The main ground was the failure to initiate penalty proceedings while passing the order under sections 201(1) and 201(1A) by the Assessing Officer (AO). The Revenue contended that the penalties were justified due to the failure of the assessee to deduct tax on reimbursement of food expenses paid to employees.2. Reasoning for penalty imposition: The AO imposed penalties based on the findings of short deduction of tax during a survey related to TDS provisions. The CIT(A) deleted the penalties citing a reasonable and sufficient cause for the failure to deduct tax. The CIT(A) highlighted that the appellant had a bona fide belief that tax was not deductible on the reimbursements, and the appellant rectified the error in subsequent years by deducting tax at source regularly. The CIT(A) emphasized that penalty imposition should be based on deliberate defiance of the law, which was not the case here.3. Applicability of Section 273B: The Tribunal considered the provisions of Section 273B, which state that no penalty shall be imposed if the assessee proves a reasonable cause for the failure. The Tribunal noted the appellant's reliance on specific sections of the IT Act regarding tax exemptions for certain allowances and the appellant's belief that TDS was not applicable to the reimbursements. Citing case law and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalties, emphasizing the absence of mala fide intention or deliberate defiance of the law.4. Judgment: After hearing both sides and examining the material, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalties under section 271C. The Tribunal found that the appellant had a reasonable cause for the failure to deduct tax at source on the reimbursement of food expenses, as there was a genuine belief regarding the applicability of tax provisions. The Tribunal's decision was based on the principles of bona fide belief and the absence of deliberate non-compliance with the law.In conclusion, the Tribunal affirmed the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalties under section 271C, emphasizing the importance of considering reasonable causes for non-compliance and the absence of deliberate defiance of tax provisions.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found