2009-VIL-446--DT

Equivalent Citation: [2010] 320 ITR 494 (P & H)

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

425/09 (O & M)

Date: 19.08.2009

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (TDS)

Vs

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

Yogesh Putney foe the appellant.

BENCH

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL and MRS. DAYA CHAUDHARY JJ.

JUDGMENT

The Revenue has preferred this appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act") against the order dated December 22, 2008, of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "B" passed in I. T. A. No. 509/DEL/2008 for the assessment year 2004-05, proposing to raise following substantial questions of law :

"(i) Whether the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in deleting the penalty under section 272A(2)(g) on the ground that there is no loss of revenue and the fault committed by the assessee is only of technical and venial in the nature?

(ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in deleting the penalty ignoring the mandatory provisions of section 272A(2)(g) wherein the legislature has used the word `shall'?"

2. The assessee is a Department of the Haryana Government. It committed default in issuing tax deducted at source certificates under section 203 of the Act. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings and levied penalty under section 272A(2)(g) of the Act. The stand of the assessee was that it was under bona fide belief that tax deducted at source certificates were to be issued and submitted with the annual return. On that account, there was delay. No loss was caused to the Revenue as the deduction of tax had already taken place. The Assessing Officer did not accept this plea. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) accepted the explanation of the assessee and deleted the penalty, which order has been affirmed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal observed :

"3. We have considered the facts of the case and rival submissions. We find that the tax was properly deducted and paid in time in the treasury. Thus, the Revenue did not suffer in any manner in so far as collection of tax is concerned. There were delays in issuing certificates to the payees, for which a satisfactory explanation has been furnished. The payee has not raised any grievance in this matter. Therefore, the default, if any, is technical and venial in nature, not justifying the levy of penalty."

3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

4. The basis for imposing penalty is a mere technical violation and having regard to the facts and circumstances, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal found valid explanation for the technical violation.

5. No substantial question of law arises.

6. The appeal is dismissed.

 

DISCLAIMER: Though all efforts have been made to reproduce the order accurately and correctly however the access, usage and circulation is subject to the condition that VATinfoline Multimedia is not responsible/liable for any loss or damage caused to anyone due to any mistake/error/omissions.