2014 (1) TMI 387

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he amount of TDS was deposited in sue time there was no loss of revenue and the appellant having handed over the return to the agency appointed by the Income-tax department in time there was no deliberate and contumacious default on the part of the appellant. Thus the levy of penalty was uncalled for in view of the principle decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Case of (Hindustan Steel Ltd. -v- State of Orissa) reported in AIR 1970 SC.253. 3. For that when the agency appointed by the Income-tax department accepted the return in hard copy on 11.06.2010 without any objection rather undertook to convert the same to soft copy for a charge but delayed the uploading for 38 days beyond 15.06.2010, the appellant cannot be made liable for such delay....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....alary and other bills of the staff. He was responsible for causing deduction of TDS of Income-Tax from the Salary Bills so paid and deposits the same in each month. NSDL had appointed M/S B. S. Subudhi & Sons, Bhubaneswar as the TIN FC agency authorised to accept the quarterly statement of TDS deposited, from the deductors of tax. The due date for submission of return for the 4th quarter of 2009-10 was 15.6.2010. The TDS return for the 4th quarter was submitted with the TIN FC, M/S B.S.Subudhi & Co on 11.6.2010 i.e. before the due date. The TIN FC accepted the return in hard copy and undertook to e-file the same by converting the same to soft copy for which service he also raised bill for Rs.6601- including conversion charge, upload charge ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ncy was explained before the Addl. Commissioner, Income Tax (TDS), Bhubaneswar in the explanation filed before him on 06.10.2010 in writing. But the learned AddI. Commissioner took a technical view of the matter that the assessee should have submitted the quarterly statement on computer media in MB Floppy or CD ROM as required in the proviso to Rule 31-A of the Income Tax Rules. The learned AR of the assessee submitted that Rule 31-A also permits submission of quarterly statement through hard copy and if the TIN FC accepts the hard copy before the due date on charging conversion charge, then no exception should be taken that the return was not filed before 15 June, 2010. Rule 31-A is not a mandatory requirement as it is only a matter of pro....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....casioned. But the report of the Inspector or the statement of the TIN FC was not confronted to the assessee and the delay caused by the TIN FC was made the basis for levying the penalty on the assessee. The principle of natural justice was grossly violated since the TIN FC has never asked the assessee for any correct information on PAN Number etc. as alleged and this fact could have been explained before the lower authority if opportunity would have been granted. 5.3. The learned AR of the assessee further submitted that both the authorities failed to appreciate that the TIN FC had sufficient time to convert the statement into soft copy and upload the same by due time. The said agency could have refused to receive the hard copy of the stat....