AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
At the outset, we would point out that the revenue has preferred only one appeal and, Therefore, the revenue is directed to see that the court fee on the second appeal for the other year is deposited. The Registry is directed to give a separate number for the other appeal. Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order.
In these appeals, the following question is raised for adjudication :
"Whether the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the penalties imposed u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was not assessable on the assessed in respect of the financial years 1997-98 and 1998-99 ?"
For the assessment years 1997-98 and 1998-99, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA Nos. 1163 and 1164 (Del)/2001 held that there was reasonable cause for not depositing the tax on account of short deduction and against that decision, the revenue has preferred these appeals, inter alia, contending that the penalty which was levied u/s 271C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act) could not be set aside. The Tribunal has considered the facts and circumstances of the case and arrived at the aforesaid conclusion.
Whether there is "reasonable cause" or not, is a question of fact. In the case of Azadi Bachao Andolan Vs. Union of India, , the court considered these aspects. We have already examined this in ITA 17/2003 and other matters decided this morning session and, considering these aspects, we are of the opinion that as no question of law arises in the present case the appeals are required to be dismissed. It is made clear that in the appeals, the court has examined only the question with regard to "reasonable cause" and no other aspect.
Accordingly, the appeals are dismissed with no order as to costs.