2015 (10) TMI 381 - AT - Income Tax

Appellate Tribunal rules in favor of assessee, emphasizing discretion in penalty imposition

The DCIT, Circle 3 (1) Hyderabad Versus M/s. Sheetal Refineries Ltd.,

The DCIT, Circle 3 (1) Hyderabad Versus M/s. Sheetal Refineries Ltd., - TMI Issues involved: Appeal against levy of penalty under section 221(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961.Detailed Analysis:1. Background and Facts:The case involved cross-appeals against the order of the CIT(A) regarding the penalty under section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee company had not paid self-assessment tax due to financial difficulties arising from the closure of its factory by the Pollution Control Board and the subsequent construction of a new plant. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) issued a notice and levied a penalty of 25% of the tax payable.2. Assessee's Contention:The assessee contended that the non-payment of self-assessment tax was due to circumstances beyond its control, such as the factory closure and financial stress caused by expansion and interest burdens. The company had also been declared sick under the Sick Industrial Companies Act. The assessee argued that it had valid reasons for the delay in tax payment and eventually paid the taxes in full within seven months.3. CIT(A)'s Decision:The CIT(A) partially accepted the assessee's contention and reduced the penalty to 10% of the total taxes due. The CIT(A) emphasized that the imposition of penalty under section 221(1) is discretionary and should consider the circumstances of the assessee. The CIT(A) acknowledged the financial crisis faced by the company and reduced the penalty amount accordingly.4. Appellate Tribunal's Decision:The Appellate Tribunal, after considering the submissions and the CIT(A)'s order, found that the assessee had valid reasons for the delay in tax payment and was not a willful defaulter. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had paid the taxes in full within a reasonable time frame and had genuine reasons for the delay. Therefore, the Tribunal decided to delete the penalty partly confirmed by the CIT(A) and allowed the assessee's appeal while dismissing the Revenue's appeal.5. Conclusion:The Tribunal's decision highlighted the importance of considering the circumstances of the assessee in cases of delayed tax payments. It emphasized that penalty under section 221(1) is not automatic and should be imposed judiciously, taking into account the reasons for the delay. The Tribunal's decision provided relief to the assessee based on the genuine financial difficulties faced by the company, ultimately leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal and the allowance of the assessee's appeal.This detailed analysis showcases the progression of the case, the arguments presented, and the ultimate decision by the Appellate Tribunal regarding the penalty under section 221(1) of the Income Tax Act.