Foreign travel tax penalties were upheld for delayed payment and late return filing under the governing rules.

The foreign travel tax framework required carriers to deposit collected tax within thirty days, provided interest for delayed payment, and authorised penalty after observance of natural justice for non-payment within the prescribed time. On that construction, delay in remitting collected tax attracted penal consequences, and the penalty for delayed payment was upheld. Rule 10A of the Foreign Travel Tax Rules, 1979 also specifically prescribed penalty for delayed submission of returns within stated monetary limits, so the penalty for late filing of returns was likewise upheld. The revision applications therefore failed because both penalties were held legally sustainable under the governing tax scheme.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether penalty for delayed payment of Foreign Travel Tax was sustainable under the amended Finance Act, 1979 and the Foreign Travel Tax Rules, 1979. (ii) Whether penalty for delayed submission of Foreign Travel Tax returns under Rule 10A of the Foreign Travel Tax Rules, 1979 was sustainable.

Issue (i): Whether penalty for delayed payment of Foreign Travel Tax was sustainable under the amended Finance Act, 1979 and the Foreign Travel Tax Rules, 1979.

Analysis: The statutory scheme required the tax collected by carriers to be deposited within thirty days and provided for interest on delayed payment. It also imposed penalty, after observance of natural justice, where the carrier failed to pay the tax within the prescribed time. On a harmonious reading of the relevant provisions, the default in remitting collected tax attracted penal consequence.

Conclusion: The penalty for delayed payment of Foreign Travel Tax was upheld and is against the assessee.

Issue (ii): Whether penalty for delayed submission of Foreign Travel Tax returns under Rule 10A of the Foreign Travel Tax Rules, 1979 was sustainable.

Analysis: Rule 10A, as brought into force by the notification, specifically prescribed penalty for delayed submission of returns within the stated monetary limits. The delay in filing the returns therefore fell within the penal provision applicable to the assessee.

Conclusion: The penalty for delayed submission of Foreign Travel Tax returns was upheld and is against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The revision applications failed because the imposed penalties were held to be legally sustainable under the governing foreign travel tax framework.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory scheme expressly prescribes deposit of collected tax within time, interest for delay, and penalty for non-compliance, the penal provisions are enforceable upon default, and a separately prescribed penalty for delayed return filing is also valid when the rule so provides.

---