2023 (5) TMI 256 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty upheld for late filing of tax statements under Income Tax Act

The ITAT upheld the penalty order u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the assessee for delays in filing quarterly statements, emphasizing ... Penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) - delay in filling E-TDS - In order JCIT has specifically mentioned that the assessee has not given any reason for the delay in filling the quarterly statements - HELD THAT:- As decided in Raja Harpal Singh Inter College [2016 (5) TMI 1109 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] as observed that timely filling of e-TDS returns helps department to process the returns whose tax has been deducted. E-TDS statements not only increases the reach of the department but also leads to creation of an audit trail that can be utilized as an effective tool against detection of tax evasion. Therefore, Hon’ble High Court observed that stringent action is required against such defaults. The Hon’ble High Court upheld the Penalty Order. No order of Jurisdictional Hon’ble High Court has been brought to our notice. In this case no valid reason has been given by the assessee for the delay in filling the Quarterly statements. Therefore, it means there is no valid reason for the delay. The assessee in the statement of facts submitted to the CIT(A) has claimed that no loss to revenue has been caused. However, it does not mean that assessee is allowed to skip the provision of filling the quarterly statements. As per the Income Tax Act, assessee was duty bound to file the Quarterly statements within the statutory time limit mentioned in the Act. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has failed to file the quarterly statements within the statutory time. Therefore, respectfully, following the decision above we uphold the Penalty Order u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Act. We are of the opinion that sufficient opportunity was granted by the ld.CIT(A) and the Joint Commissioner of Income tax but the assessee failed to avail such opportunity. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee. Issues Involved:1. Deletion of Penalty2. Jurisdiction of CIT(A)3. Application of Mind by CIT(A)4. Equitable Relief5. Additional Grounds and EvidenceSummary:1. Deletion of Penalty:The assessee contested that the CIT(A) failed to delete the penalty as directed by the ITAT. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS) had observed delays in filing quarterly statements u/s 200(3) of the Act and levied a penalty of Rs. 1,09,304/- u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The ITAT upheld the penalty, noting that the assessee did not provide any valid reason for the delay in filing the quarterly statements.2. Jurisdiction of CIT(A):The assessee argued that the CIT(A) exceeded his jurisdiction by confirming a penalty of Rs. 1,09,304/- instead of Rs. 16,300/- as directed by the ITAT. The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had acted within his jurisdiction as per the directions for denovo-adjudication.3. Application of Mind by CIT(A):The assessee requested to levy costs on CIT(A) for non-application of mind and not following ITAT directions. The ITAT found that the CIT(A) had provided sufficient opportunity to the assessee, who failed to avail it, and thus dismissed this ground.4. Equitable Relief:The assessee sought just and equitable relief. The ITAT, however, upheld the penalty, emphasizing the importance of timely filing of e-TDS returns for effective tax administration and compliance.5. Additional Grounds and Evidence:The assessee prayed to add, alter, amend, take additional grounds, submit additional evidence, and/or withdraw the grounds during appellate proceedings. The ITAT did not find any new evidence or grounds to alter the penalty decision.Conclusion:The ITAT dismissed the appeal of the assessee, upholding the penalty order u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and emphasized the necessity of timely filing of e-TDS statements to ensure efficient tax administration and compliance. The order was pronounced in open Court on 04th May, 2023.