DR. MUHAMMAD NAEEM, ACCOUNT ANT MEMBER . -- This appeal has been instituted by the registered person against the impugned appellate order dated 19.07.2017 recorded by the learn ed CIR(A) Multan wherein the learned first appellate authority dismissed the appeal of the registered person on non-prosecution.
2. Summary of the facts, relevant to the disposal of present appeal are that it has been observed by the department that the registered person has failed to e-file sales tax returns for the tax periods June 2016 & July 2016.
Accordingly , the registered person was called upon through issuance of show-cause notice that as to why the penalty amount to Rs. 10,000/- may not be levied. The registered person offered the reply and has submitted that the returns were late filed due to some technical reasons however the adjudication officer did not satisfy and culminated the proceedings by passing order in original and levied a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- for the tax period under consideration. Being aggrieved, the registered person filed appeal before the learned CIR(A) who by virtue of his impugned appellate order dated supra dismissed the appeal of the registered person on non-prosecution. The registered person feels discontented with the orders of the authorities below filed appeal before this forum.
3. The learned counsel of the registered person has strongly challenged the orders of the authorities below and has contended that the registered person could not file the returns within time due to technical error of IRIS system/net.
He has further contended that the registered person filed nil statements and no loss of revenue was involved. The learned counsel of the registered person has argued that the delay caused in e-filing of returns for both the periods was not deliberate but due to technical errors of IRIS system. In this context, he has relied upon the certain judgments of the Courts. To conclude his arguments, the learned counsel of the registered person has prayed for vacation the orders of the authorities below . On the other hand, the learned DR has supported the orders of the authorities below for the reasons recorded therein.
4. We have considered the rival arguments of both the parties, perused the relevant record available before us and benefitted the case-laws cited at the bar. We have observed that the registered person tiled nil returns and no loss of revenue is involved for late filing of returns. The reasons given by the counsel of the registered person is that due to technical errors of IRIS system the returns were not filed within due time. It is also noted that the department has also failed to establish the willful or deliberate default on the part of the registered person for late filed the returns. The penalty can be levied only when it is established that revenue loss is involved or the registered person intentionally or habitually late filer. In view of the position narrated above we accept the appeal of the registered person and delete the penalty levied by the adjudication of ficer. Order accordingly .
5. Resultantly appeal filed by the registered person stands accepted.