SURGUJA GYANODAYA ASSOCIATION,SURAJPUR (CG) vs. JOINT. CIT, RANGE- KORBA, KORBA(CG)

PDF · subscribers
ITA 33/BIL/2015Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 January 2018AY 2008-093 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that for a technical or venial breach of the Act's provisions, no penalty should be levied. Given the Nil income and the assessee's bonafide belief, the penalty for delayed filing was cancelled.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a society registered u/s.12AA, filed its income tax returns for AY 2008-09 and 2009-10 showing Nil income. The returns were filed significantly late, leading to a penalty levied u/s.272A(2)(e) by the AO.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty u/s.272A(2)(e) is leviable for delayed filing of return when the declared income is below the taxable limit and the delay is considered a technical breach.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 272A(2)(e),Section 12AA,Section 139(4A),Section 139(4C)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR

Before: SHRI N.S.SAINI, AM & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE,JM

For Appellant: Shri G.S.Agrawal, AR
For Respondent: Shri O.P.Chaudhary, DR
Hearing: 18/01/2018Pronounced: 18/01/2018

Per Shri N.S.Saini, AM: These are the appeals filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), Bilaspur, both dated 16.07.2013 for the assessment year 2008-2009 & 2009-2010. 2. The sole grievance of the assessee in both the appeals is that the CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty levied u/s.272A(2)(e) of the Act by the assessing officer at Rs.54,600/- for assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.18,100/- for assessment year 2009-2010. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a society registered u/s.12AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and filed return of income for assessment year 2008-09 and 2009-10 showing Nil income. According to the AO, the return of income was required to be filed by the assessee on or before 30.09.2008 for assessment year 2008-09 and on or before 30.09.2009 for the assessment year 2009-10 as per provisions of Section 139(4A) or 139(4C) of the Act. Since the assessee filed the return of income for assessment year 2008-09 on 30.03.2010 and for the assessment year 2009-10 on 30.03.2010, there was a delay of 546 days in assessment year 2008-09 and 181 days in assessment year 2009-10. Hence, he levied penalty u/s.272A(2)(e) of the Act @100/- per day and levied penalty of Rs.54,600/- in the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.18,100/- in assessment year 2009-10. 4. Before the CIT(A) the assessee submitted that the assessee filed return of income declaring income at Rs.Nil and, thus, the income is below the taxable limit. Therefore, the assessee had bonafide belief as the income was below the taxable limit, there was no obligation to file the return of income.

5.

On appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer.

6.

The AR of the assessee reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities.

7.

On the other hand, the DR supported the orders of lower authorities.

8.

We find that the facts narrated above are not in dispute that the assessee filed return of income for both the years under appeal showing Nil income, thus, income of the assessee was below the taxable limit and, therefore, the assessee had bonafide belief that when the income was below the taxable limit, there was no obligation to file the return of income. We find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v The State of Orissa, 83 ITR 26, has held that for a technical or venial breach of the provision of the Act, no penalty is to be levied. In view of the above decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd.(supra), we are of the considered view that the assessee society is not liable for penalty u/s.272A(2)(e) of the Act for delay in filing the return of income. Therefore, we cancel the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer of Rs.54,600/- for the assessment year 2008-09 and Rs.18,100/- for assessment year 2009-10. 9. In the result, both appeals filed by the assessee are allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on Thursday, the 18th Day of January, 2018 at Raipur. (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (N. S. SAINI) न्याययक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Raipur; ददन ांक Dated 18/01/2018 प्र.कु.मि/PKM, Senior Private Secretary आदेश की प्रयिलऱपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीऱ थी / The Appellant- 1. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent- 2. आयकर आयुक्त(अऩीऱ) / The CIT(A), 3. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 4. विभ गीय प्रतततनधध, आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, Raipur / DR, ITAT, Raipur 5. ग र्ड प ईऱ / Guard file. 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, सत्य वऩत प्रतत //// (Senior Private Secretary) Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur

More judgments on Section 272A(2)(e)

All 82 judgments and leading authorities on Section 272A(2)(e) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →