CIT v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd.

244 ITR 417High Court2000#6014 most cited

What is CIT v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Penalty under section 272A(2) cannot be levied for mere technical or venial breaches of tax law, especially when the revenue has not suffered any loss due to the assessee's actions.

19

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v Harsiddh Construction P Ltd · 244 ITR 417 · penalty u/s 272A(2) · technical breach · venial breach · no loss to revenue · discretion of AO · TDS default

Sections most often in play

Section 201(1A)Section 203Section 271CSection 271HSection 272A(2)(g)Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273BSection 133A

Issues it is cited on

section 272a(2)(k)section 203section 272a(2)section 276section 271htax collected at sourceinterest under section 201(1a)section 272section 271csection 206csection 272asection 206

Judgments citing CIT v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd.

Xcellon Education Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Addl. CIT, TDS, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2681/AHD/2017[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

…along with interest. Thus, assessee has compensated Govt. for late payment of TDS. > Accordingly, there is no loss to the revenue. / > Under such circumstances, penalty u/s 272A(2) cannot be levied. > Reliance is placed on CIT v Harsiddh Construction P Ltd - 244 ITR 417 (Guj). ITA No.2678 to 2681/Ahd/2017 (4 Appeals) 7 Whether to levy penalty u/s 272A(2) and 271C is at the “discretion” of AO; such discretion has to be exercised judiciously and accordingly, penalty u/s.272A(2) and 271C must be levied merely for technical or venial breach”. Whether penalty u/s.272A(2) and 271C of the Act should be levied or not…

Xcellon Education Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Addl. CIT, TDS, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2680/AHD/2017[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

…along with interest. Thus, assessee has compensated Govt. for late payment of TDS. > Accordingly, there is no loss to the revenue. / > Under such circumstances, penalty u/s 272A(2) cannot be levied. > Reliance is placed on CIT v Harsiddh Construction P Ltd - 244 ITR 417 (Guj). ITA No.2678 to 2681/Ahd/2017 (4 Appeals) 7 Whether to levy penalty u/s 272A(2) and 271C is at the “discretion” of AO; such discretion has to be exercised judiciously and accordingly, penalty u/s.272A(2) and 271C must be levied merely for technical or venial breach”. Whether penalty u/s.272A(2) and 271C of the Act should be levied or not…

Xcellon Education Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Addl. CIT, TDS, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2679/AHD/2017[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

…along with interest. Thus, assessee has compensated Govt. for late payment of TDS. > Accordingly, there is no loss to the revenue. / > Under such circumstances, penalty u/s 272A(2) cannot be levied. > Reliance is placed on CIT v Harsiddh Construction P Ltd - 244 ITR 417 (Guj). ITA No.2678 to 2681/Ahd/2017 (4 Appeals) 7 Whether to levy penalty u/s 272A(2) and 271C is at the “discretion” of AO; such discretion has to be exercised judiciously and accordingly, penalty u/s.272A(2) and 271C must be levied merely for technical or venial breach”. Whether penalty u/s.272A(2) and 271C of the Act should be levied or not…

Xcellon Education Limited, Ahmedabad vs. Addl. CIT, TDS, Ahmedabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2678/AHD/2017[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Mar 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

Section 133ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250(6)Section 271CSection 272A(2)(g)

…along with interest. Thus, assessee has compensated Govt. for late payment of TDS. > Accordingly, there is no loss to the revenue. / > Under such circumstances, penalty u/s 272A(2) cannot be levied. > Reliance is placed on CIT v Harsiddh Construction P Ltd - 244 ITR 417 (Guj). ITA No.2678 to 2681/Ahd/2017 (4 Appeals) 7 Whether to levy penalty u/s 272A(2) and 271C is at the “discretion” of AO; such discretion has to be exercised judiciously and accordingly, penalty u/s.272A(2) and 271C must be levied merely for technical or venial breach”. Whether penalty u/s.272A(2) and 271C of the Act should be levied or not…

Soil & Water Consevation Department, Latur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(TDS), Range-Nashik, Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 41/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.41/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 200(3)Section 272(2)(k)Section 272A(2)(k)

…ions of law which does not attract levy of penalty as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Harsiddh Construction (P) Ltd.(2000)244 ITR 417. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that it is not a fit case for levy of penalty. Thus, we direct the AO to delete the penalty. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced on this 03rd day of June, 2024. (ASTHA CHANDRA) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; "दनांक / Dated…

Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Addl. CIT, TDS Range, Ahmedabad

ITA 2408/AHD/2017[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Addl. CIT, TDS Range, Ahmedabad

ITA 2406/AHD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Corrtech International Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1358/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, (OSD), Ahmedabad

ITA 821/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

The DCIT(OSD) Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1129/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., (OSD) Range-1, Ahmedabad

ITA 2652/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

The DCIT(OSD) Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 2578/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

The DCIT(OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad vs. Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1871/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

Corrtech International Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., (OSD)Range-1, Ahmedabad

ITA 1785/AHD/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble& Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 14ASection 26(1)(iii)

…ed that there is no loss to the revenue. Since there is no loss to the revenue, penalty u/s 272A(2) of the Act cannot be levied. The Ld. AR further relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in case of CIT vs. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. – 244 ITR 417 (Guj.)”. The Ld. AR further submitted that it is merely a technical or venial breach. In any case, late filing of TDS returns is merely a technical or venial breach which does not warrant levy of penalty u/s 272 of the Act. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa – 83 IT…

Ambience Developers & Infrastructure P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 628/DEL/2015[2009-10 (F.Y. 2008-09)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2017

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri T.R. Talwar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Singh, Senior DR
Section 272A(2)(k)

…ts 6 ITA Nos.627 & 628/Del./2015 relied upon the cases of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa - 83 ITR 26, Commissioner of Income-tax v. State Bank of Patiala -[2005] 277 ITR 315 (P&H) & Commissioner of Income-tax v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. - 244 ITR 417. 7. For facility of reference, press release dated 25.09.2007 and 12.09.2008 issued by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes are extracted for ready perusal as under :- “PIB Dated 25.09.2007: It has been observed that in most of the TDS (tax deducted from salaries) / TCS (tax deducted fro…

Ambience Developers & Infrastructure P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 627/DEL/2015[2008-09 (F.Y. 2007-08)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2017

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri T.R. Talwar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Singh, Senior DR
Section 272A(2)(k)

…ts 6 ITA Nos.627 & 628/Del./2015 relied upon the cases of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa - 83 ITR 26, Commissioner of Income-tax v. State Bank of Patiala -[2005] 277 ITR 315 (P&H) & Commissioner of Income-tax v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. - 244 ITR 417. 7. For facility of reference, press release dated 25.09.2007 and 12.09.2008 issued by Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Direct Taxes are extracted for ready perusal as under :- “PIB Dated 25.09.2007: It has been observed that in most of the TDS (tax deducted from salaries) / TCS (tax deducted fro…

Turbo Travels India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT (TDS) RG 3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4961/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4961/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Turbo Travels India Pvt. The Additional बनाम/ Ltd., Commissioner Of Income V. 105, Doctor House, Tax – (Tds), Pedder Road, Range 3, Mumbai -400026. 10 Th Floor, Smt. K.G. Mittal Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg., Charni Road, Mumbai – 400002. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaact 4767 G .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande
Section 2Section 200(3)Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)

…eliance on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa,(1972) 83 ITR 26(SC). The learned counsel also relied upon Hon’ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of CIT v. Harsiddh Construction (P) Ltd., (2000) 244 ITR 417(Guj.) and also the decision of the ITAT, Chandigarh Bench in the case of Corporation Bank v. JCIT in ITA No. 161/Chd/2015 , whereby the facts were identical and the penalty was deleted. The ld. Counsel submitted that there was no case for levy of penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Act as the assessee had a reasonable cause for not filing the TDS retur…

Rani Grover, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT (TDS) RG 3, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee for all three assessment years are allowed

ITA 6334/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah (AR)For Respondent: Shri K.C. Kanojia (DR)
Section 197Section 253Section 272ASection 272A(2)(k)

…venial breach of law only. Keeping in view the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v State of Orissa 83 ITR 26 (SC) and the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CI?T 244 ITR 417 (Guj), we do not find any good reason to interfere with the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Therefore, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.” 6. In the present case neither the order of AO nor ld. Commissioner (Appeals) order revealed that the act of assessee was deliberate or in defiance of law or the assessee is gui…

Shreerang Mercantile (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT (TDS) 3, Mumbai

ITA 7495/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/7495, 4599 & 4600/Mum/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 वष" Shreerang Mercantile (I) Pvt. Ltd. Addl.Cit, (Tds)-3, Room No.1001 501, Shreerang House, 5Th Floor Smt. K.G. Mittal New Marine Lines Ayurvedic Hospital Bldg., Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Charni Road Pan:Aadcs 0954 M Mumbai-400 020. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-Dr Assessee By: Shri Dharmendra M. Shah सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 19.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" अिधिनयम क" क" धारा क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Orders Dated 8.10.2014 & 19.5.2014, Of The Cit(A)-14 The Assessee Has Filed The Appeals For The Above Mentioned Three Years.Issue Involved In All The Appeals Is About Levy Of Penalty U/S.272A(2)(K)Of The Act,For Filing Quarterly Returns In Form Number 24Q/ 26Q Belatedly.So,We Are Adjudica - Ting All The Appeals By Single Order.

For Appellant: Shri Dharmendra M. ShahFor Respondent: Shri N. Sathya Moorthy-DR
Section 200(3)Section 254(1)Section 272A(2)(K)Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ई” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं सी एवं सी सी. एन सी एन एन. "साद एन "साद "साद,"याियक "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/7495, 4599 & 4600/Mum/2014 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 वष" Shreerang Mercantile (I) Pvt. Ltd. Addl.CIT, (TDS)-3, Room No.1001 501, Shreerang Hous…

CIT v. Harsiddh Construction Pvt. Ltd. (244 ITR 417) — Cited in 19 Judgments | BharatTax