TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 159
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d appeals ITA Nos.224 to 226/LKW/2026 have been preferred by the Assessee against the respective orders, all dated 09.12.2025, passed by the NFAC for assessment year 2013-14. 2.0 Since the facts and the issues involved in the above captioned appeals are almost identical, therefore, they were taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of through this common order for the sake of convenience. 3.0 First, we will deal with the issues involved in the case of the assessee in ITA No.220/LKW/2026 for assessment year 2015-16. 4.0 The brief facts of the case are that a grievance petition was received by the Income Tax Department from teachers of the assessee College, i.e., Rampal Trivedi Inter College, Gosaiganj, Lucknow. As per gr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er of the year under consideration by 31.07.2014 but the same was filed only on 05.09.2017 with a delay of 1131 days. The AO, therefore, issued a show cause notice, requiring the assessee to explain the reason for delay. In response, the assessee, vide letter dated 01.09.2017 submitted that "Income Tax deducted from salary paid has regularly been deposited in Central Government Account within stipulated time. Form No. 24Q has also been filed. Due to sad demise of head clerk who look after the TDS/Income Tax matters, details could not be traceable at present. It is requested that a week's time may kindly be allowed to file the relevant details." After considering the reply furnished by the assessee, the AO noted that the assessee's submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se for the failure of filing of e-TDS statement on a higher side of Rs. 1 lac. 4. That even subject to prejudiced above the penalty should have been levied Rs. 10,000/- and not Rs. 1,00,000/-. 5. That the order passed by the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) is against the law and principle of natural justice. 6. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter vary and/or withdraw any grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 7.0 On identical set of facts, as narrated above in first quarter of assessment year 2015-16, in second quarter, third quarter and fourth quarter of assessment year 2015-16 and also in second quarter, third quarter and fourth quarter of assessment year 2013-14, the AO imposed the m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/- under Section 271H(1)(a) be set aside. 11.0 Per contra, the Ld. Sr. D.R. submitted that Chapter XVII-B mandates timely filing of TDS returns within the statutory deadlines prescribed under section 200(3) read with Rule 31A of the Income Tax Rules. It was further submitted that the assessee failed to file the returns within the stipulated timeline without any valid extension, rendering the statutory default undisputed. The Ld. Sr. D.R. also submitted that the law makes no exception for a Government College and being a public entity, a higher standard of statutory adherence and discipline is expected rather than laxity. It was submitted by the Ld. Sr. D.R. that multiple opportunities were afforded by the Ld. First Appellate Authority, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scretionary window, ranging from a minimum of Rs. 10,000/- to a maximum of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Such statutory discretion entrusted to a quasi-judicial authority must be exercised on sound judicial principles, taking into account the justifying circumstances, gravity of the default, and proportionality. The maximum penalty is not to be levied automatically in every routine case of delay, otherwise, the lower threshold of Rs. 10,000/- crafted by the Parliament would be rendered redundant. It is not the case of the Revenue that the tax deducted at source was retained by the assessee. The tax deducted was duly deposited into the Government treasury. Once the statements were eventually uploaded, the tax credits stood regularized in favour of the ded....