Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI ‘I’ BENCH, MUMBAI
O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, VP:
These appeals are directed against the consolidated order dated 30th January 2014 1. passed by the learned CIT(A) in the matter of penalty under section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment years 2005-06 to 2012-13.
Common grievance raised in all these appeals is as follows:- On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in the law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer (‘AO’) in levying penalty under section 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for not withholding tax on reimbursement of expense paid by the Appellant to Braitrim (UK) Ltd. to 4753/Mum/2014 Assessment Year: 2005-06 to 2012-13
Page 2 of 2 3. The impugned penalties are levied in respect of non deduction of tax at source from certain reimbursements made by the assessee to Braitrim UK Ltd. However, vide our order of even date, we have deleted the related tax withholding demands raised under section 201 r.w.s. 195 on the ground that the payments in question were not taxable in the hands of the recipient. That is what a co-ordinate bench decision dated 21st August 2019 has also held in the case Braitrim UK Ltd.
Learned representative fairly agree that in the above a situation, the impugned penalty is required to be deleted. We, therefore, uphold the plea of the assessee, hold that the assessee was not required to deduct tax at source from payments in question, and delete the impugned penalties. The assessee gets the relief accordingly.
In the result, all the six appeals are allowed. Pronounced in the open court today on the 21st May, 2021.