Smt.Neeta Anto, Cochin vs Assessee

1 ITA No. 431/Coch/2014 SA. 61/Coch/2014

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before Shri N.R.S. Ganesan (JM) and Shri Chandra Poojari (AM)

I.T.A No. 431/Coch/2014 & S.A. No.61/Coch/2014 (Assessment year 2012-13)

Smt. Neeta Anto vs The ADIT (TDS) 412/934, First Floor Kochi Pulleppady Road, Kochi 682 018 PAN : AHFPA5964K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Appellant by : Ms Soumya Prakash Respondent by : Shri K.K. John

Date of hearing : 12-02-2015 Date of pronouncement : -03-2015

ORDER

Per N.R.S. Ganesan (JM)

The appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(A)

confirming levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act for delayed payment of tax

deducted at source u/s 194C, 194-I and 194J of the Act. The

ld.representative very fairly submitted that the tax was deducted, however,

it could not be deposited within the time limit prescribed. The ld.counsel

very fairly submitted that on identical set of facts, this Tribunal in the case 2 ITA No. 431/Coch/2014 SA. 61/Coch/2014

of M/s Classic Concepts Home India (P) Ltd ITA Nos 469-472/Coch/2014

dated 09-01-2015 confirmed the levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act.

Therefore, the ld.representative submitted that the issue is covered against

the assessee.

2. On the contrary, Shri K.K. John, the ld.DR submitted that admittedly,

the assessee deducted tax; however, it was not deposited within the time

limit prescribed. The tax was deposited belatedly in the Government

account. Therefore, the penalty was levied u/s 271C of the Act. The ld.DR

submitted that on identical set of facts, this Tribunal confirmed the levy of

penalty in the case of M/s Classic Concepts Home India (P) Ltd.

3. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and also

perused the material available on record. It is not in dispute that tax was

deducted at the time of making the payment. However, the tax deducted

was not deposited in the government account. Therefore, there

was a default on the part of the assessee for depositing the tax deducted

at source in the government account. On identical set of facts, this

Tribunal confirmed the levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act. It has been

fairly conceded by the ld.counsel for the assessee and the ld.DR that this

Tribunal on identical set of facts confirmed the levy of penalty u/s 271C; 3 ITA No. 431/Coch/2014

SA. 61/Coch/2014

therefore, the issue is covered against the assessee. We have also

carefully gone through the order of the Tribunal in M/s Classic Concepts

Home India (P) Ltd (supra). This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that

on identical set of facts, similar penalty u/s 271C is confirmed by this

Tribunal. In view of the order of this Tribunal in M/s Classic Concepts

Home India (P) Ltd (supra) and for the reasons stated therein the levy of

penalty in the impugned case is confirmed.

4. In view of our decision above, the stay application becomes

infructuous.

5. In the result, the appeal and the stay application of the assessee

stand dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on this 06th March, 2015.

Sd/- sd/- (Chandra Poojari) (N.R.S. Ganesan) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

Cochin, Dt : 06th February, 2015 pk/- copy to:

1. Smt. Neeta Anto, 41/934, First Floor, Pulleppady Road, Kochi 682 018

2. The AddlCIT(TDS), Kochi

3. The Commissioner of Income-tax(TDS), Kochi

4. The Commissioner of Income-tax(A)-III, Kochi

5. The DR (True copy) By order

Asstt. Registrar, Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench