2010 (2) TMI 162 - HC - Income Tax

Tribunal finds reasonable cause for tax non-payment penalties deletion, emphasizes financial position importance.

The Tribunal upheld the deletion of penalties for non-payment of self-assessment tax, finding reasonable cause due to funds being under attachment and ... Penalty- Failure to file the return- The assessee-respondent had failed to file return and on his death in an accident the assessee-respondent had filed the return. Thus, the question raised by the Revenue before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was concerning imposition of penalty under section 140A(3) of the Act. The Tribunal rejected the aforesaid submission of the Revenue by observing that the provisions of section 140A(1) of the Act are attracted only when the assessee furnishes a return of income and section 140A(3) is to operate from the date when the return of income is furnished if such a return is not accompanied by payment of admitted taxes. Accordingly, the financial position at the time of filing of return alone is relevant. Accordingly, the plea raised by the Revenue was rejected. Held that- dismissing the appeal, that the cancellation of penalty was justified. Issues:1. Whether the Tribunal was right in deleting the penalty based on reasonable cause for non-payment of self-assessment taxRs.2. Whether non-access to funds in the bank could be a reasonable cause for non-payment of self-assessment taxRs.3. Whether the action of objecting to the Revenue's move proved the lack of intention to pay self-assessment taxRs.Analysis:Issue 1:The case involved seven appeals by the Revenue against the same assessee-respondent for different assessment years. The appeals were against the Tribunal's order deleting penalties under section 140A(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) found that the delay in tax payment was not the fault of the assessee-legal heir, considering the funds were under attachment and the Department later recovered the tax. The Tribunal upheld this finding, stating that the question of reasonable cause for non-payment is a question of fact. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the Commissioner's conclusion based on the evidence before him, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeals.Issue 2:The Revenue argued that the attachment of the bank account on the date of filing the return should not be considered a reasonable cause for non-payment of taxes, as the assessee had the opportunity to operate the account before the attachment. However, the Tribunal rejected this argument, emphasizing that section 140A(1) of the Act applies when the return is furnished, and the financial position at that time is crucial. As the return was not accompanied by tax payment, section 140A(3) operated from the date of filing the return, making the financial position at that time relevant.Issue 3:The Tribunal also addressed the contention that the assessee's objection to the Revenue's move indicated a lack of intention to pay the tax. The Tribunal found that the assessee had provided explanations for the delay in tax payment, which were accepted by the Commissioner and supported by evidence. The Tribunal emphasized that interference under section 260A of the Act is limited to substantive questions of law and cannot be based on a possible alternative view. As no substantial question of law was found, the appeals were dismissed.In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision to delete the penalties based on reasonable cause for non-payment of self-assessment tax was upheld, emphasizing the importance of the financial position at the time of filing the return and the lack of evidence to support the Revenue's challenges to the findings of fact.