2013 (12) TMI 305 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal cancels Rs.67,430 penalty for delayed e-TDS filing, blames franchise holder.

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Versus ADDL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) BHUBANESWAR

The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, setting aside the penalty of Rs.67,430 imposed under section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for ... Penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) – Income-tax is deducted from the contractors’/ suppliers’ bills and credited to the respective head of Central Government through book adjustment - E-TDS was filed through a franchise holder for filing of e-TDS on behalf of Government - Held that:- The reason for delay in filing the e-TDS for PH Division is due to delay in uploading the data by the concerned franchise holder although data regarding quarterly e-TDS of different quarters pertaining to the FY 2008-09 has been handed over much earlier to him – Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:1. Imposition of penalty under section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for delayed filing of e-TDS returns.2. Justification for the delay in filing the e-TDS returns.3. Appeal against the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT(A).4. Comparison with similar cases where penalties were deleted by the Tribunal.Issue 1: Imposition of Penalty under Section 272A(2)(k)The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cuttack dealt with an appeal regarding the imposition of a penalty of Rs.67,430 under section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the delayed filing of e-TDS returns for the financial year 2008-09 by the assessee. The penalty was imposed by the Addl.CIT(TDS) based on the delayed filing of quarterly e-TDS returns by the assessee.Issue 2: Justification for Delay in Filing e-TDS ReturnsThe assessee contended that the delay in filing the e-TDS returns for the PH Division, Baripada was due to the delay in uploading the data by the concerned franchise holder responsible for filing the e-TDS on behalf of the Government. The assessee argued that the delay was a technical lapse on the part of the franchise holder, and not due to any fault of the assessee. The delay in filing the e-TDS returns was attributed to the franchise holder's actions despite the timely submission of data by the assessee.Issue 3: Appeal Against Imposed PenaltyThe assessee appealed before the first appellate authority, the CIT(A), who upheld the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer. The assessee then appealed to the Tribunal challenging the confirmation of the penalty under section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal considered the submissions of both parties and the facts on record to make a decision on the appeal.Issue 4: Comparison with Similar CasesThe Tribunal, after analyzing the facts and circumstances of the case and considering similar cases, found that the delay in filing the e-TDS returns was indeed due to the delay in uploading data by the franchise holder. The Tribunal noted that in previous cases with similar situations, penalties under section 272A(2)(k) were deleted by the Tribunal. As no contrary decision was presented by the Departmental Representative, the Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and canceled the penalty of Rs.67,430 imposed on the assessee under section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, citing the technical lapse of the franchise holder as the reason for the delay in filing the e-TDS returns and following the precedent of deleting penalties in similar cases.