TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (12) TMI 61
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pre J.- The decision rendered in this appeal shall also govern disposal of the other two appeals being I.T.A. Nos. 146 and 148 of 1999 because all the three appeals are between the same assessee except the difference is that they relate to different assessment years involving common point. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue (Commissioner of Income-tax) under section 260A of the Income-tax Act....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ther, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in holding that penalty can be imposed either on the MPEB or its principal officer even though senior accounts officer is the person responsible for deducting the tax at source within the meaning of section 201(1) of the Income-tax Act and hence, liable to penalty under section 271C of the Act?" Heard Sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....posing a penalty under the aforementioned sections making the principal officer liable for the same. It is not in dispute that the Board/assessee on being noticed, deposited the entire money and complied with the requirement. The Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) did not accept the explanation offered by the assessee and imposed penalty under section 271C of the Act. H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ds. In a case of this nature, the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa [1972] 83 ITR 26 (SC); [1970] 25 STC 211 (SC), when their Lordships held: "Penalty will not also be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be ....