Just a moment...
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the prosecution and cognizance for delay in deposit of TDS and TCS under Sections 276B and 276BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 should be quashed in exercise of inherent jurisdiction on the ground that the delay was sufficiently explained by the COVID-19 pandemic and related business disruption.
Analysis: The Court found that the petitioners had deposited the deducted and collected tax belatedly, but the delay was shown to be caused by the prevailing COVID-19 situation and its economic impact on the business. The Court relied on its earlier decisions holding that the pandemic could constitute a sufficient explanation and reasonable cause in delayed remittance cases, particularly where the tax amount had ultimately been deposited with interest and no revenue loss remained. The Court also noted that, although the offences were compoundable and the alternate remedy ordinarily ought to be pursued, the facts disclosed exceptional circumstances warranting interference under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Conclusion: The prosecution and the cognizance order were quashed, and the petitioners succeeded.