Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.49 seconds)The Advocates Act, 1961
M/S Us Technologies International Pvt. ... vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax on 10 April, 2023
8. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material placed on
record and order of the lower authorities. We note from this submission made
by the ld. AR of the assessee that the assessee purchased immovable property
on 09.08.2014 from UIT, Udaipur for Rs. 103,29,600/- and delayed deposited
TDS @ 1% u/s 194IA on 06.03.2017 on presumption of UIT, Udaipur that it is
a Government of Rajasthan Institution so not liable for tax liability. Further, we
note that the assessee has delayed in the deposit TDS at Rs. 103,296/- on
23.02.2017 and interest of Rs. 34,056/- on 06.03.2017. We observe that ld. AO
I.T.A. No.194/Jodh/2023
Sh. Uday Bhowmick 10
has rejected the reply filed by the assessee during the assessment proceedings
and levied penalty of Rs. 103,296/- u/s 271C of the Act that the assessee has
failed to deduct and deposit of Rs. 103,296/- on the payment for the purchase of
immovable property in stipulated time as prescribed and before the ld. CIT(A)
that the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the reasons given by the assessee
for failure to deduct the tax at source on payment made by the purchase of land
is that he purchased the property while auction from UIT, Udaipur and the UIT
Officers has demanded payment of the full amount and informed that the TDS
is not applicable on UIT, Udaipur because it is government body. To support his
submissions, the ld. AR for the assessee has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in US Technologies International Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2023) 453
ITR 0644 (SC) which is as under:-
Commr.Of Income Tax-Xviii,Delhi vs Bank Of Nova Scotia on 7 January, 2016
"7.2........... Therefore, in view of the Hon'ble Apex Court decision in the case of CIT
vs. Bank of Nova Scotia, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court hold that the assessee has
deliberately not avoided TDS and there is no contumacious conduct on the part of the
assessee. Therefore, considering that aspect of the fact in this case. The bench feels
that in this case levy of penalty is not correct as the assessee has reasonable cause for
such failure and the revenue has already disregarded and disallowed the claim of the
I.T.A. No.194/Jodh/2023
Sh. Uday Bhowmick 11
assessee on account of non deduction of tax Thus, based on that set of facts, we hold
that the levy of penalty is deleted on the ground that there was bona fide and
reasonable cause in not deducting TDS. Thus the ground of appeal taken by the
assessee on the reasonableness is considered and accordingly, the penalty is deleted."
Section 273B in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Muthoot Bankers on 6 April, 2000
2.5 The revenue relied upon case of CIT vs Muthoot Banker ITA 57 of 2015 Kerala
High Court for failure in establish reasonable cause for failure to deduct tax at source,
I.T.A. No.194/Jodh/2023
Sh. Uday Bhowmick 9
the facts of present case different, herein the case appellant is not alleged to failure to
deduct tax at source, herein the case delayed deposit of TDS. So, that is not applicable
in instant case.
1