- (1.) Raja Harpal Singh Inter College the College, Singramau in District Jaunpur has filed this appeal under section 260 -A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the Act to assail the order dated 21 January 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad the Tribunal by which the appeals preferred by the College against the orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) partly confirming the penalty levied under section 272 -A(2)(k) read with section 200(3) of the Act have been dismissed.
(2.) The questions of law that have been framed in this appeal are as follows : "I. Whether, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal as well as, authority below were justified to levy the penalty under Section 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act on the non filing of e -TDS statement which already filed before passing the penalty order by J.C.I.T., Allahabad. II. Whether, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, as well as, authority below were justified to levy the penalty under Section 272A(2)(k) of the I.T.A. without considering the explanation of the college, as well as, during the pendency of the application for extension to time dated 16.01.2013. III. Whether, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, was justified to reject the appeal outrightly without going into the merit of the case, as well as, no intention and no loss of the revenue because the tax has been deposited always within time. IV. Whether, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, was justified in rejecting the appeal despite the fact that in compliance of notice dated 13.12.2012 the return (statement) was filed between 08.02.2013 to 15.03.2013 and order was passed by the Joint Commissioner Income Tax (TDS) on 22.04.2013."
(3.) The Assessing Officer, on going through the records of the College, detected that the College had failed to furnish e -TDS quarterly statements online for the Assessment Years 2008 -09, 2009 -10, 2010 -11, 2011 -12 and 2012 -13 and had consequently violated the provisions of section 200(3) of the Act. The present appeal relates to the Assessment Year 2008 -09. Accordingly, a notice dated 12 October 2012 was issued to the appellant requiring it to ensure compliance upto 26 October 2012. The appellant, however, did not respond to the aforesaid notice.;