Ita/61/2016 Of Smt. Neeta Anto v. The Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC &THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2016/5TH JYAISHTA, 1938 ITA.No. 61 of 2016 () ---------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 431/2014 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCHDATED 06-03-2015 APPELLANT/APPELLANT:-------------------- SMT. NEETA ANTO 412/934, FIRST FLOOR, PULLEPPADY ROAD, KOCHI BY ADVS.SRI.ANIL D. NAIR SRI.R.SREEJITH KUM.SOUMYA PRAKASH KUM.MEKHALA M.BENNY RESPONDENT:----------- THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), C.R.BUILDINGS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI 682 018. BY SC SRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ITA No.61/2016 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF PENALTY FOR THE YEAR2012-2013 DATED 26.9.2013 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT.2012-2013 DATED 26.9.2013 ISSUED TO THE APPELLANT. ANNEXURE B- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX (APPEALS) DATED 30.7.2014.TAX (APPEALS) DATED 30.7.2014. ANNEXURE C- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATETRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH DATED 6.3.2015.TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH DATED 6.3.2015. TRUE COPY p.s.to judge CSS/ Antony Dominic & Dama Seshadri Naidu, JJ.------------------------------------------- ITA No.61 of 2016-------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26[th] day of May, 2016JUDGMENT Antony Dominic, J. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and thelearned standing counsel for the respondents. The assessee has filed this appeal challenging theorder passed by the Income Tax Tribunal, Kochi in ITANo.431/2014. The appeal in question was filed againstthe orders confirming the levy of penalty under Section271C of the Act for delayed payment of tax deducted atsource under Section 194C, 194-I and 194J of the Act. Areading of the order passed by the Tribunal itself showsthat before the Tribunal, the representative of theappellant himself had admitted that the issue raised wascovered against the assessee by the order of the Tribunalin the case of M/s Classic Concepts Home India (P) Ltd. in ITA No.61/2016 2 ITA Nos.469-472/Coch/2014 dated 9.1.2015. In suchcircumstances, we do not find any substance in thecontention now raised before us nor we find any questionof law arising out of the order. The appeal is rejected. Sd/-Antony Dominic, Judge sd/-Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE