2021 (9) TMI 587

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T and CIT(A) were not justified in imposing penalty of Rs. 6,32,267/- u/s 271C of the I.T.Act on the default which was bonafide and of technical nature. 3. On facts and in circumstances of the case Ld. JCIT and CIT(A) were not justified in imposing penalty of Rs. 6,32,267/- u/s 271C of the I.T.Act on the default which was due to late deposit of TDS and the same was deposited during the same Financial Year." 2. The only effective ground is against sustaining the penalty of Rs. 6,32,267/- imposed u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act"). 3. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that "TDS" inspection was carried out on 04.02.2010 at the premises of the assessee. Thereafter, order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act was passed on 24....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Coca Cola Beverages Pvt.Ltd. vs CIT [2007] 163 Taxman 355 (SC) to buttress the contention that the tax alongwith interest thereon, has been paid. Moreover, the deductee has disclosed the amount in its return of income. In these circumstances, no penalty ought to have been imposed on the assessee. He further submitted that the authorities below have not considered the case law as relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee during the first appellate proceedings. 7. Per contra, Ld. Sr. DR opposed these submissions and supported the orders of the authorities below. Ld. Sr. DR submitted that only explanation offered by the assessee is with regard to payment made to the owner....