Tribunal cancels penalty under Income-tax Act, finding timely tax payment despite minor delay

The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)' decision to cancel the penalty of Rs. 21 Lakhs imposed under section 221 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the penalty was not justified as the entire taxes were paid within the time allowed by the Assessing Officer, despite a technical delay of less than 20 days in paying interest. It was determined that the penalty under section 221 should be imposed judiciously, and in this case, the Assessing Officer's discretion led to the cancellation of the penalty. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

---

---

Issues involved:
Appeal against cancellation of penalty u/s 221 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II, Dehradun.

Summary:
The Revenue appealed against the cancellation of a penalty of Rs. 21 Lakhs imposed u/s 221 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee had filed a return of income for the assessment year 2000-01, declaring an income of Rs. 76,73,190 from Real Estate business. A demand of Rs. 30,52,501 was created, out of which Rs. 23,02,501 remained outstanding. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 222(1) for delay in payment of taxes. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) noted that the entire demand along with interest was paid by the assessee before the penalty notice was issued. The Commissioner considered financial difficulties, time extension by the ITO, and relevant circulars, and concluded that no penalty should be imposed. The Revenue contended that the default was admitted, and penalty was rightly imposed. The Commissioner's decision was supported by the assessee, arguing that the delay was covered by reasonable cause. The Tribunal found that while there was a technical delay, the penalty was not justified, as the entire taxes were paid within the time allowed by the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal held that the penalty under section 221 was not automatic and should be imposed judiciously. The Assessing Officer had discretion in such matters, and in this case, the penalty of Rs. 21 Lakhs was deemed unjustified. The delay of less than 20 days in paying interest did not warrant such a penalty. Referring to a previous Tribunal decision, it was established that penalty under section 221 was not applicable to delays in interest payments. Therefore, the Commissioner's decision to cancel the penalty was upheld, and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

---