9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Cancellation of penalty under section 271B by the Tribunal. 2. Distinction between absolute default and mere delay in filing audit report under section 44AB. Analysis: 1. The case involved the assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88 where the Tribunal was questioned for canceling the penalty under section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal found that the delay in obtaining the audit report did not constitute an absolute default by the assessee. The Tribunal referred to a previous decision and concluded that penalty under section 271B was not attracted solely due to the delay in obtaining the audit report, hence the penalty was canceled. 2. Section 44AB imposes an obligation on individuals with sales turnover exceeding a specified amount to get their accounts audited. Section 271B provides for a penalty if there is a failure to comply with the audit requirements. However, section 273B states that no penalty shall be levied if there is a reasonable cause for the failure. In this case, the assessee had applied for an extension of time for filing the return, and the audit reports were filed within the extended time. The Tribunal considered the extension granted by the department as a reasonable cause for the delay in obtaining the audit report. The Tribunal opined that the penalty under section 271B cannot be levied in every case and should only be imposed if there is no reasonable cause for the delay. In conclusion, the High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision to cancel the penalty under section 271B for the assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88. The Court emphasized the importance of considering reasonable causes for delays in compliance with tax laws and highlighted the significance of section 273B in determining the applicability of penalties under section 271B.
|
