SUB REGISTRAR, BISAULI,BADAUN vs. DIT, (I&CI), LUCKNOW

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5604/DEL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 April 2016AY 2012-133 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 the absence of competent staff and NSDL facilities constituted a reasonable cause for the delay. Therefore, the penalty levied under Section 271FA was not imposable as per Section 273B.

What were the facts?

The appellant, Sub-Registrar Bisauli, failed to file the AIR for AY 2012-13 on time. The appellant explained the delay was due to a lack of competent staff, a backward area with no computerization, and no NSDL center nearby.

What were the issues?

Whether the explanation provided by the appellant constitutes a reasonable cause for the failure to file the AIR on time, thereby invoking Section 273B to waive the penalty under Section 271FA.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271FA,Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH G NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI I.C. SUDHIR & SHRI O.P. KANT

For Respondent: Shri Rashpal Bedi, Sr. DR
Hearing: 19.04.2016

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH "G" NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI O.P. KANT

ITA No. 5604/Del/2013 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Sub-Registrar, Bisauli, vs. DIT, ( I & C ), Badaun (UP). Lucknow.

(PAN: LKNSO9011C)

(Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee by: None

Department by: Shri Rashpal Bedi, Sr. DR

Date of hearing : 19.04.2016 Date of pronouncement: 26:04.2016

ORDER

PER I.C. SUDHIR: JUDICIAL MEMBER

The appellant has questioned the validity of levy of penalty under sec. 271FA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

2.

No one is present on behalf of the appellant despite issuance of notice well in advance on the given address for 19.4.2016. He, however, furnished his explanation sent through registered post that the only officer was a lady available in the office of the appellant and she was also on long maternity leave for 180 days. The day to day office work was being done by only one clerk. He explained further that Bisauli is a very backward area and it was not computerized too. Hence, it was time taking work to compile

information and furnish them through NSDL as there was no NSDL Centre

in Bisauli.

3.

The Learned Senior DR on the other hand opposed the appeal with the

submission that the explanation furnished by the appellant is not sufficient to

absolve him from default committed by him for not filing the AIR for the

assessment year under consideration with the time, hence, the authorities

below have rightly levied the upheld penalty under sec. 271FA of the Act.

4.

Considering the above submissions, we find that under the provisions

of section 273B of the Act penalty under sec. 271FA of the Act shall not be

imposable on the person if he proves that there was reasonable cause for the

said failure. In our view, absence of competent staff and facility of NSDL

Centre at the place of assessee was reasonable cause for the appellant for not

furnishing the AIR in time. We thus invoking the provisions of sec. 273B of

the Act direct the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty levied under sec.

271FA of the Act at Rs.17,300 sustained by the Learned CIT(Appeals). The

ground is accordingly allowed.

5.

In result, the appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 26 .04.2016

Sd/- ( O.P. KANT ) Sd/- ( I.C. SUDHIR ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Dated: 26/04/2016

Mohan Lal

Copy forwarded to:

- 1) Appellant - 2) Respondent - 3) CIT - 4) CIT(Appeals) - 5) DR:ITAT

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

Date Draft dictated directly on computer | 26.04.2016 Draft placed before author | 26.04.2016 Draft proposed & placed before the second member Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. | 26.04.2016 Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS | 26.04.2016 Kept for pronouncement on | 26.04.2016 File sent to the Bench Clerk | 27.04.2016 Date on which file goes to the AR Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. Date of dispatch of Order.

More judgments on Section 271FA

All 190 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271FA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →