75th Founding Day Lecture Meeting on “India@2030” Know More

August 2012

Penalty: Delay in filing declaration in Form No. 15H: Section 272A(2)(f): A.Ys. 1991-93, 1992-93 and 1994-95: No obligation to file declaration prior to 1-6-1992: Penalty not imposable for that period: Further the penalty to be restricted to the tax amount as per subsequent clarificatory amendment to proviso.

By K. B. Bhujle, Advocate
Reading Time 1 mins
fiogf49gjkf0d
[CIT v. Krishna Cold Storage, 250 CTR 134 (Guj.)]

For the A.Ys. 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1994-95 penalty u/s.272A(2)(f) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was imposed for delay in filing declaration in Form 15H. The Tribunal held that no penalty was imposable for the period prior to 1-6-1992 because there was no statutory obligation to file the prescribed form u/s.197A. The Tribunal also held that the penalty should be restricted to the amount of tax deductible by giving retrospective effect to the proviso which is clarificatory.

On appeal by the Revenue, the Gujarat High Court upheld the decision of the Tribunal and held as under: “

(i) Failure to file the declaration in Form No. 15H prior to 1-6-1992 not being a default u/s. 272A(2) (f), no penalty could be levied for delay up to 1-6-1992.

(ii) In view of proviso, which is remedial in nature and consequently retrospective in operation, penalty could not exceed the tax deductible.”

Download PDF

You May Also Like

PAN: TDS: Section 206AA, r.w.s. 139A: Constitutional validity; Article 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950: Requirement to furnish PAN: Section 206AA is unconstitutional and has to be read down from statute and made inapplicable to persons whose income is less than taxable limit: Therefore, banking and financial institution shall not invariably insist upon PAN from small investors as well as persons who intend to open an account in bank or financial institution.

Settlement of case: Abatement: Sections 245C, 245D and 245HA : A.Ys. 1989-90 to 1993-94: Effect and scope of section 245HA: Where there was no fault of the applicant and he himself is not responsible for delay in getting decision on the settlement application, the application shall not abate.