2021 (4) TMI 690

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Assessee in so far as Issue of Penalty u/s 271F is concerned. 2. That the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that even though the Assessee had sufficient Cash and Bank balance, it had ignored to pay the tax dues. 3. That the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that the Assessee has not exhibited reasonable cause to explain the delay in filing the returns. 4. That the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating the fact that provisions of Section 271F has been introduced only as a measure to ensure timely filing of Returns by taxpayer so as to enable the AO to carry out necessary further action with respect to the returns as prescribed under the Act and it does not provide for the non levy of Penalty....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erred appeal before this Tribunal wherein this Tribunal set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and remand the question of existence of reasonable cause under section 273B of the Act for fresh consideration by the Ld.AO in the light of additional evidence filed before the Tribunal. 7. In the remand proceedings the Ld.AO issued fresh notice giving an opportunity to assessee. Assessee filed various details like bank statement financial statements etc. Ld.AO however observed that assessee had sufficient back balance in the bank to pay the income tax dues however the same was ignored. 8. The Ld.AO once again confirmed the penalty of Rs. 5000/- for violation of section 271F of the Act. 9. Aggrieved by the order of Ld.AO, assessee preferred app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....O14] 50 taxmann.com 232 (SC), has held that capital gains payable by company on sale of assets by court not liquidation expenses, cannot he paid in priority over dues of workmen secured creditors. Also, the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana in the case of Leo Edibles & Fats Ltd Vs. Tax Recovery Officer (central), Hyderabad [2018] 99 taxmann.com 226 has held that Income-tax department cannot claim any prior(y payment from liquidation estate merely because it had issued attachment eider prior to initiation of liquidation proceedings under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. 6.3 From the above discussion made under the Act, it is clear that preference should be given in the manner as the company has actually done. It is s....