LAKE CITY SUPER SPECIALITY HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.,THANE vs. ADDL. CIT (TDS), THANE

Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) Per Bench:खंडपीठ के अनुसार खंडपीठ के अनुसार खंडपीठ के अनुसार खंडपीठ के अनुसार Challenging the orders,dated 20/01/2016,of the CIT(A)-1,Thane,the assessee has filed the present appeals.The effective ground of appeal is about levy of penalty u/s.272(2A)(k)of the Act. While passing the penalty order,the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee had filed quarterly returns of Text Deducted at Source(TDS)belatedly.He issued notice u/s.272(2A)(k)/ 274 r.w.s.200 (3) of the Act to show cause as to why and order imposing penalty for late filing of quarterly TDS returns should not be passed. In its response to the show cause notice,the assessee stated that delay in filing the TDS-returns was caused due to outsourcing of the filing of returns, that it had asked an outside-agency to file the quarterly returns, that the outside agency did not file the returns in time.The assessee relied upon certain case-laws in its support. 2.After considering the submission of the assessee, the AO held that it had not furnished any evidence to show that it was prevented by sufficient cause for delay in filing the text directed at source statement. He levied a penalty of Rs. 1.26 lakhs u/s.272(2A)(k) of the Act.

2922-25/M/12;Lake City 3.Aggrieved by the penalty order of the AO,the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority(FAA).Before him,it made elaborate submissions about late filing of the TDS statements.After considering the assessment order and the submissions of the assessee,he held that the assessee had not filed the quarterly statements in time,that the numbers of days of default in respect of each quarter had been calculated by the AO, that nothing was brought on record by the assessee to show as to why the outside agency had filed the TDS-statements late, that it had engaged professionals for specific job,that there should not have been any delay in filing the statements,that no evidence was furnished to show that efforts were made to obtain PAN.s of the directors,that the assessee had failed to establish reasonable and sufficient cause for delay in filing the TDS statements.Finally,he upheld the order of the AO imposing penalty.

4.During the course of hearing before us,the Authorised Representative (AR) contended that the assessee had not made any default in deducting the tax on various payments made,that it had deposited tax with in time period in all the quarters for the year under appeal,that all the directors of the company were doctors by profession,that the work of filing statements was outsourced to an agency,that that assessee relied entirely on the agency for TDS job, that assessee had been regularly in filing its TDS-returns in other assessment years, that the delay was only procedural and the default was not deliberate or intentional, that the late filing of the returns was a technical breach,that AY.2009-10 was the first year of introduction of 26AS.She relied upon the cases of ARK Corporation (172 taxman 339) Royal Metal Printers (P.) Ltd. (37SOT139) Rajasthan Tribal Area Development Co-Operative Federation Ltd (60TTJ427).The Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order of the AO and the FAA.

5.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us we find that the assessee had not made any default in depositing the tax directed at source within prescribed time period in all the months for the year under consideration except for the month of July, 2008. There was delay of six days in depositing the tax for that month.It is a fact that the only default committed by the assessee was not filing the statements of TDS in time.We find that the assessee had argued that it had hired an outside agency to carry out the job of filing statements of TDS and the agency did not file the returns in time.In our opinion,the explanation filed by the assessee can be considered as one of the possible cause for filing belated returns.It is also to be remember -ed that the company is run by doctors.Section 273 B

2922-25/M/12;Lake City