AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 332
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Addl. CIT (TDS) in imposing penalty u/s. 272A(2)(k) of the Act. 3. We note that the assessee is a partnership firm, engaged in works contractorship/commission. According to the Addl. CIT that the payments made to the sub-contractors are exigible to TDS u/s. 194C, 194I, 194J, 194H of the Act and also has an obligation to furnish quarterly statements of TDS in Form No. 26Q within the prescribed due dates. The said details by way of a tabular form is reflected in para 2 of the order of Addl. CIT. We note that the Addl. CIT imposed penalty u/s. 272A(2)(k) of the Act for delay in filing quarterly statements of TDS. The CIT(A) confirmed the order of Addl. CIT ex-parte of the assessee. 4. The ld. AR, Shri Kapil Hirani submits that the ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ein that earlier under section 272A(2)(k) of the Act, penalty was leviable where the tax deduction certificate was not issued in time. However, by Finance (No.2) Act, 2004 w.e.f. 01.04.2005, it has been provided that where a person fails to deliver or cause to be delivered copy of statement within time specified in section 200(3) of the Act or the proviso to section 206C(3) of the Act, then he shall pay by way of penalty sum of Rs. 100/- for every day of default. It is further provided under the said subsection that the amount of penalty for failure shall not exceed the amount of tax deductible or collectable, as the case may be. It is further provided that no penalty shall be levied under clause (a) for failure to furnish the statement und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... imposed penalty only from 01.04.2010 though regular Principal had joined the college on 25.01.2010. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of assessee as no explanation was furnished for non-furnishing TDS statements in time. The Hon'ble High Court thus, in this regard observed that the requirement of filing e-TDS statements in time could not be overlooked. In such circumstances, the Hon'ble High court held that it cannot be urged by the Counsel for the assessee that no penalty could have been imposed for non-filing e-TDS returns in time since it had not resulted in any loss to the Revenue. The Hon'ble High Court further took note of the fact that before the Assessing Officer, no explanation was offered. However, an explanation was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... penalty chargeable under section 272A(2)(k) of the Act has been restricted i.e. suitably reduced in the case of appellant as held by the Hon'ble High Court. 27. Another reliance placed upon by the learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue is on the ratio laid down by the Chandigarh Bench of Tribunal in Central Scientific Instruments Organization's case (supra). In the facts of the said case, the assessee had filed TDS returns in Form No.26Q belatedly after expiry of 10 years from prescribed time limit and the assessee had submitted that he was unaware of provisions of section 200(3) of the Act. The assessee had deposited the tax to the Central Government at relevant time, however, the assessee failed to furnish TDS retu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not being available to small assessees, who are in appeal before us, then the delay in furnishing the e-TDS returns late should be liberally construed. Hence, there was practical difficulty on the part of assessee to comply with newly introduced requirement of e- TDS filing of TDS statements, being technical delay and not venial in nature, merits to be considered as reasonable cause for non-levy of penalty as per the requirements of section 273B of the Act. We hold so. In this bunch of appeals, there are cases where the assessee has defaulted in not depositing tax deducted at source in time, in such cases, the returns were delayed because of default on behalf of the deductor. In such cases, penalty under section 272A(2)(k) of the Act is le....