AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (5) TMI 122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... International Taxation, Noida is said to have been passed on 28.03.2017 at Noida and on the same date i.e. 28.03.2017, the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, International Taxation Circle, Lucknow has issued the demand notice under Section 156 of the Income Tax Act. 4. That when the appellant was having reasonable cause in not deducting TDS u/s 195 the penalty imposed is bad in law. 5. That the appellant was not in the knowledge that Smt. Nidhi Ram Singh was an NRI and there were no circumstances to suggest to appellant that she was NRI hence there was reasonable cause with appellant in not deducting TDS in terms of section 195. 6. That the order passed is against the merit, circumstances and legal aspects of the case." 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee purchased a plot of land for a sale consideration of Rs. 3,04,50,750/- on 14.06.2005. One of the co-sellers of the property Smt. Nidhi Raman was non resident Indian (NRI) who had 1/5th share in the property to the tune of Rs. 60,00,000/-. The assessee while making payment to Smt. Nidhi Raman failed to withhold tax under section 195 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the "Act") being the pa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is that under Section 275(1)(c) of the Act, no order imposing penalty can be passed after expiry or financial year in which the proceedings in the course of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated or, completed or six months from the end of the month in which action for imposition of penalty is initiated, whichever period expires later. It is submitted that in the present case, the relevant financial year expired on 31.03.2016 and six month period from the date of order i.e. 30.12.2015, expired on 30.06.2016. Consequently, the present penalty order dated 28.03.2017 and the demand notice dated 28.03.2017 issued in furtherance thereof are barred by limitation and, as such, are not enforceable. 4.3 From the arguments of the appellant it is gathered that the appellant is considering the date of initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271C of the Act from the date of passing the order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act. Penalty proceedings u/s 271C of the Act is an independent proceeding and is to be levied by Joint Commissioner of Income Tax on a reference received in this regard by the assessing officer passing the order u/s 201(1)/201(1A) of the Act.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Dy. Commissioner of Income tax, International Taxation, Circle, Lucknow is the officer concerned having jurisdiction over the person responsible to deduct tax u/s 195 of the Act. Hence, it is held that the officer passing the orders u/s 201(1)/201(1A) and 271C of the Act is having jurisdiction over the appellant assessee to pass such orders. Ground of appeal also fails on this issue. 4.8 It is further gathered that notice u/s 271C(1)(a) was issued on 03.05.2016 & 29.08.2016. The appellant has received these notices and a submission dated 03.06.2016 was also filed before the assessing officer. In view of such facts, it is evident enough that the appellant was provided reasonable opportunity of being heard during the penalty proceedings. The submission made by the appellant during the penalty proceedings has been duly mentioned by the AO in the impugned order. In view of such facts, it is held that reasonable opportunity of being heard is provided to the appellant during the penalty proceedings. Ground of appeal on this issue is dismissed. 4.9 In regard to reasonable cause for not deducting TDS, the appellant only reiterates that the appellant was not in knowledge t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or three Asstt Years 2004-05 to Asstt Year 2006-07 had not been received by the Tribunal from the Courier till date. Then we enquired the from the DTDC Courier service office. They could not figure out what happened of our courier even after taking time for more than a month. We were in a bonafide belief that our appeals filed were delivered before Tribunal New Delhi well within time by the Courier service. PRAYER We request your honours to kindly condone delay for filing the appeal as there was no default from our side. The Appeals for the Asstt Year 2004- 05 to 2006-07 are being again filed alongwith this condonation application as appellant wants to go under scheme Vivaad Se Vishwas Tak to end all the litigation." 7. Record shows that before the Tribunal the hearing was fixed on 25.07.2022, 29.09.2022, 05.12.2022, 16.02.2023, 25.04.2023. None attended for and / or on behalf of the assessee whereas the Ld. Sr. DR was present on all the above dates of hearing. We, therefore, proceed to decide the appeal ex-parte after hearing the Ld. Sr. DR. It is submitted by the Ld. Sr. DR that it is not a fit case for condoning the impugned delay in filing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Report that it cannot be disputed that in dealing with the question of condoning delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act, the party has to satisfy the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the prescribed time and this has always been understood to mean that the explanation has to cover the whole of the period of delay. 11. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Veda Bai alias Vaijayanta Bai Baburao Patil vs. Shantaram Baburao and ors. 253 ITR 798 (SC) held that in exercising the discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant factor so the case calls for a more cautious approach and in the latter case no such consideration may arise and such a case deserves a liberal approach. No hard and fast rule can be laid down in this regard. The court has to exercise its discretion on facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression "sufficient cause" the principle of advancing substan....