2017 (2) TMI 279

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... : Rahul Kaushik, Senior Standing Counsel for Income-tax JUDGMENT 1. The writ petitioner challenges an order of the Commissioner of Income- tax made under section 264 of the Income-tax Act 1961. The revisional authority had by impugned order upheld the order of the Assessing Officer that there was no reasonable cause in the facts of the case and that penalty under section 271C had to be levi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sessing Officer for compliance with its direction. The court, however, expressed its opinion with respect to the levy of penalty under section 271C rather decisively in para. 35 (page 251) : "35. Section 271C inter alia states that if any person fails to deduct the whole or any part of the tax as required by the provisions of Chapter XVII-B then such person shall be liable to pay, by way ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y to levy of penalty can be fastened only on the person who do not have good and sufficient reason for not deducting tax at source. Only those per sons will be liable to penalty who do not have good and sufficient reason for not deducting the tax. The burden, of course, is on the per son to prove such good and sufficient reason. In each of the 104 cases before us, we find that non-deduction of tax....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he expatriate employees have paid directly the taxes due on the foreign salary by way of advance tax/self-assessment tax. The tax deductor-assessee was under a genuine and bona fide belief that it was not under any obligation to deduct tax at source from the home salary paid by the foreign company/HO and, consequently, we are of the view that in none of the 104 cases penalty was leviable under sec....