9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Levy of penalty under section 271 B for non-obtaining audit report within time. Analysis: The appellant contested the penalty under section 271 B for not obtaining the audit report within the specified time. The appellant argued that the assessment order did not mention the initiation of penalty proceedings, thus rendering the penalty invalid. The appellant cited legal precedents to support the argument that penalty initiation and levying must align with the specific default committed. It was emphasized that penalty proceedings are quasi-criminal, shifting the burden to the department to prove the assessee's conduct. The appellant also presented reasonable cause for the delay, citing meager profits, lack of awareness, and personal circumstances affecting timely filing. The revenue department countered the appellant's arguments by asserting that the initiation of penalty need not be explicitly mentioned in the assessment order. They challenged the appellant's claim of timely obtaining the audit report, stating that the burden of proof lies with the assessee. The revenue department questioned the bona fide belief of the appellant and relied on the lower authorities' decisions to support their stance. Upon reviewing the contentions from both sides and the relevant legal decisions, the judge noted that the specific requirements for penalty initiation under section 271-B differ from those under section 271(1). The judge highlighted a precedent where obtaining the audit report, not its filing, was crucial. Despite the appellant's failure to provide evidence of the audit report's date, the judge emphasized that the burden of proof rested with the revenue department to demonstrate any delay in obtaining the report beyond the specified date. As the revenue department failed to substantiate their claim, the judge ruled in favor of the appellant, deeming the penalty unsustainable and consequently deleting it. In conclusion, the appeal by the assessee was allowed, and the penalty under section 271 B for not obtaining the audit report within the specified time was deemed invalid and deleted based on the lack of evidence presented by the revenue department to support their claim of delay in obtaining the audit report.
|
