2013 (1) TMI 183 - AT - Income Tax

Penalty u/s 271BA Transfer pricing Assessee failed to furnish Transfer pricing report u/s 92E by due date - form No. 3CEB - Under Rule 10E - Rule 12(2) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 Held that - As per Sec. 92E it is clear that the report in Form 3CEB is to be filed by the specified date i.e. due date for filing the return. Nowhere in sec. 92E or Rule 10E it is mentioned that such report should be annexed with return of income. As per Rule 12(2), the return of income/Fringe Benefits shall not be accompanied by report of Audit. The report in form 3CEB from an accountant is not a report of audit. It is a report in respect of international transaction certifying the claim of the assessee. Therefore, the contention of the assessee that return of income in electronic form was not to accompany the report in Form 3CEB is not correct. In favour of revenue

Summary

Issues:
Confirmation of penalty under sec. 271BA of the Income Tax Act for Assessment Year 2006-07.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The only issue in this case pertains to the confirmation of a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- imposed under sec. 271BA of the Income Tax Act. The assessee failed to furnish a Transfer Pricing Report under sec. 92E of the Act by the specified due date, leading to penalty proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer (AO).

2. The AO initiated penalty proceedings as the assessee did not submit the required accountant's report in Form No.3CEB by the due date. The assessee argued that electronic filing rules exempted them from filing certain reports physically. However, the AO found the submission insufficient and imposed the penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- under sec. 271BA.

3. On appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the penalty, emphasizing the necessity of filing the accountant's report in Form No.3CEB by the due date as per sec. 92E of the Act. The CIT(A) concluded that the penalty was justified due to the assessee's failure to comply with the statutory requirements.

4. During the appeal before the tribunal, the assessee's representative argued that the audit report was ready before the due date, and physical filing was done before the assessment completion. The representative contended that the penalty was unwarranted due to the bona fide conduct of the assessee. In contrast, the Senior DR argued that the belated filing of the audit report necessitated the penalty under sec. 271BA.

5. The tribunal analyzed the provisions of sec. 92E and Rule 10E, emphasizing the requirement to obtain and file the accountant's report in Form 3CEB before the due date for filing the return. It clarified that the report need not be annexed with the return of income, debunking the assessee's argument based on Rule 12(2) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. The tribunal upheld the penalty, stating that the failure to file the report in Form 3CEB before the due date warranted the penalty under sec. 271BA.

6. Ultimately, the tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the imposition of the penalty under sec. 271BA of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2006-07.