Tribunal Clarifies Scope of Section 271C in Grindly Gases Case

In a significant development for taxpayers, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Ahmedabad has clarified that mere delay in remitting Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) after deduction does not attract penalty under Section 271C of the Income Tax Act. This decision came through the case of Grindly Gases & Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd. vs JCIT, reaffirming the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in a prior ruling.

Key Takeaways from the Ruling

• Scope of Penalty under Section 271C: The tribunal reiterated that penalty is leviable only if there is a failure to deduct TDS itself, not for delayed remittance after the deduction has been made.
• Delayed Remittance With Interest: If the deducted TDS is remitted late but along with applicable interest, the penalty under Section 271C does not apply.
• Supreme Court Reference: The judgment aligns with the Supreme Court’s ruling in U.S. Technologies International Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT, which clearly held that Section 271C does not extend to cases involving delayed TDS payment.

Background of the Case

The assessee, Grindly Gases & Petrochemicals Pvt. Ltd., faced a penalty of ₹4,25,157 under Section 271C for allegedly failing to deduct TDS on interest payments. The company contended that it had deducted the TDS but was late in remitting the amount due to financial constraints and paid the outstanding amount along with interest.

ITAT’s Ruling and Next Steps

The tribunal remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for a fresh examination focusing on whether there was indeed a failure to deduct TDS or just a delay in remittance. The AO is directed to carefully examine relevant documents such as challans, Form 26Q, and ledger extracts to ascertain the facts before proceeding.

What This Means for Taxpayers

This ruling provides clarity and relief for businesses and individuals who might face penalties for delayed TDS remittance, provided they have deducted the tax at source correctly and paid the dues with interest. It emphasizes that the penalty under Section 271C is strictly for non-deduction of TDS, distinguishing it from delayed payment issues that attract interest under other provisions.

As tax authorities and assessees await the AO’s re-examination in this case, this decision stands as a strong precedent protecting taxpayers from unwarranted penalty levies for procedural delays in remittance.

This update is crucial for companies managing their TDS compliance, highlighting the importance of prompt deduction and payment along with interest to avoid penalties. Keeping thorough records like challans and Form 26Q will support your case if timing issues arise.

Leave a reply