9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Appeal against cancellation of penalty under section 271A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Analysis: The appeal before the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Nagpur concerned the cancellation of a penalty of Rs. 15,000 levied by the Assessing Officer under section 271A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The case involved a partnership firm that had maintained audited books of account as per section 44AB of the Income-tax Act. However, during assessment proceedings, the firm failed to produce the books of account, leading to the penalty imposition by the Assessing Officer. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) later cancelled this penalty, prompting the Revenue's appeal. During the hearing, the Departmental Representative argued that section 44AA(2) mandates the retention and production of books of account by business or professional entities for income computation. Failure to retain books till assessment completion violates section 44AA(2) and defeats the purpose of maintaining accounts. The Representative emphasized interpreting laws to serve the Act's purpose. On the other hand, the assessee's counsel contended that section 44AA(2) requires maintaining books, and Rule 6F specifies retention periods only for certain professions, not for general business entities. Therefore, penalizing non-retention of books by a business entity under section 271A is unwarranted. The Tribunal analyzed the provisions of section 271A, which penalizes failure to maintain or retain books of account as required by section 44AA or related rules. It noted that the penalty in question was for the failure to retain books. Section 44AA delineates obligations for different professions, with Rule 6F specifying retention periods for specified professions only. As no specific rules exist for retention by non-specified professions, penalizing them under section 271A for non-retention is unjustified. The Tribunal concurred that penalizing non-retention without prescribed rules would be inappropriate. As the penalty was imposed for a default not covered under section 271A, the Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to cancel the penalty. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, affirming the cancellation of the penalty under section 271A.
|
