Calcutta High Court
Sarat Chatterjee & Co. Vsp Pvt.Ltd vs The Commissioner Of Income Tax on 4 August, 2025
OD- 6
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
ORIGINAL SIDE.
WPO/515/2025
SARAT CHATTERJEE & CO. VSP PVT.LTD.
VS
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, KOLKATA ORS.
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE JUSTICE RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY
Date: 4th August, 2025
Appearance
Ms. Arati Agarwal, Adv.
Ms. Rosy Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Ankit Daga, Adv.
..for the petitioner
Mr. Tilak Mitra, Adv.
...for the respondents
1. The petitioner is aggrieved with the sanction order passed under
Section 279(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as
‘the said Act’) for filing of complaint under Section 276B and 278B of
the said Act.
2. It is the petitioner’s case that though initially a notice was issued on
the petitioner on 27th April, 2022 alleging failure of payment of TDS
for the financial year 2019-20 which was followed up by a show
cause notice dated 16th August, 2024 alleging delayed payment of
TDS to the extent of Rs.13,40,68,652/-, however, by a response in
writing dated 5th September, 2024, the petitioner had duly clarified
the fact that the delayed deposit was only Rs.13,49,42,657/-. The
petitioner had also submitted the details of the challans in respect of
the TDS deducted for the financial year 2019-20 and had claimed
that it paid Rs.11,17,57,996/- though beyond due date, however,
with interest. Still, later by a further detailed response dated 30th
2
September, 2024, the petitioner had once again clarified that the
financial constraints prevented the petitioner from making payment
in time. According to the petitioner, though there was no delay in
respect of depositing Rs.2,31,84,661/- on account of TDS, however,
there had been some delay in respect of Rs.11,17,57,996/- as during
the relevant period by reasons of the covid pandemic and lock down,
the petitioner could not make the payment.
3. Ms. Agarwal, learned Advocate appearing in support of the writ
petition would submit that the petitioner had not only paid the entire
TDS that had remained unpaid but also paid interest on the same.
According to her, though the sanctioning authority for passing an
order under Section 279(1) of the said Act was obliged to consider
the defence, the same has not been considered. She would submit
that though there was a reasonable cause for the failure to pay the
tax in time, such aspect has not been appropriately considered while
passing the order dated 26th February, 2025. The aforesaid order
also does not take into consideration the CBDT circular dated 18th
October, 2016.
4. Mr. Mitra, learned Advocate appearing in support of the department
would submit that there was no irregularity in passing the aforesaid
order. He seeks leave to produce relevant record on the returnable
date.
5. Having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the respective
parties and taking note of the fact that in this case the petitioner has
deposited the entire tax along with the interest and having regard to
3
the CBDT circular dated 18th October, 2016 which, inter alia,
provides that no person shall be punishable for any failure referred
to in the said provision of Section 276B, if he proves that there was a
reasonable cause for such failure, I am of the view, at this stage no
further steps should be taken on the basis of the aforesaid
sanctioned order dated 26th February, 2025 till the next date of
hearing for Mr. Mitra to produce the relevant documents and/or
instructions.
6. List this writ petition for further consideration under the same
heading in the monthly list of September, 2025.
(RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY, J.)
akg/