TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (6) TMI 201
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No. 3 has remained to be adjudicated upon by the Tribunal while deciding the appeal vide order dated 11.6.2010. The Tribunal vide its order dated 9th February 2011 has allowed the said application of the assessee with direction to the Registry to fix the appeal for hearing on the issue raised in Ground No. 3 of the appeal, so that same may be adjudicated upon for rectification of the order dated 11.6.2010. The appeal was accordingly fixed for hearing and both the parties advanced their arguments on the issue raised in Ground No. 3. The said Ground reads as under: "3. Since in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, both the lower authorities have conveniently ignored the binding decisions of the Hon. I.T.A.T. Pune Ben....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons, the appellant Society in its Annual General Meeting held on 9.8.2009 took a conscious decision of strictly complying with the provisions of Sections 269-SS and 269-T of the Act. An affidavit as executed on 28th August 2009 by the Chairman of the appellant society in this regard was filed before the authorities below. 4. He submitted that it was explained before the A.O that the bonafide belief entertained by the appellant Society constituted a reasonable cause within the meaning and provisions of Section 273B of the Act for alleged non-compliance. In support, reliance was placed on the following case laws: i. Vishal Purandar Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, ITA No. 1290/PN/2008 ii. CIT v/s. Bandhakam ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al demand from the appellant for achieving its recovery targets. The appellant had to move before the Tribunal with its Stay Application on the same day i.e. 31st March 2010. The A.O had disobeyed the said stay order passed by the Tribunal in the matter on 12.4.2004 in S.A. No. 19/PN/2010. The authorities have even flouted the Circular No. PN/CC/Judl/Cir/2008-09/2628 dt. 10.9.2008 issued by the Ld Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune (copy supplied) conveying therein to stay the demand arising out of penalties imposed u/s. 271-D and 271-E in the cases of Co-operative Credit Societies. 7. The Ld. A.R. submitted that from the sequence of events quoted above, it is crystal clear that all the tax authorities have behaved in a arbitr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; iv. KEC International Ltd. v/s. B.R.Balkrishnan, 251 ITR 158(Bom.) 10. The Ld. D.R., on the other hand, opposed the above contentions and request of the Ld. A.R. with this submission that the authorities below have only performed their duties which they are bound to follow as per the provisions of the law. He submitted that the A.O finding that there was reasonable explanation for the default found in relation to Section 269-SS, had deleted the penalty levied u/s. 271-D. He, however, did not find substance in the explanation of the assessee so far as violation of the provision u/s. 269-T of the Act is concerned and accordingly, levied the penalty u/s. 271-E of the Act. The Ld CIT(A) after considering the submissions of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 269-SS and 269-T, respectively, should not be indiscriminately imposed. The provisions of Section 273-B should be taken in view before imposing the penalties. Based upon the said advice, the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune, vide its letter dated 10.9.2008 has conveyed to the Commissioners of Income Tax to stay the demand arising out of penalties imposed u/s. 271-D and 271- E in cases of Co-Operative Credit Societies. In this regard, the Ld Chief Commissioner of Income Tax has also cited 3 decisions out of which, 2 decisions have been pronounced by the Pune Bench of the Tribunal. In the case of Union of India and Anr. v/s. Raja Mohammed Amir Mohammed (Supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has been pleased to express its concern ove....