9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 857 - ITAT JODHPURLevy of penalty u/s 271B - Default related to Tax Audit Report u/s 44AB - Despite obtaining audit report in time, inadvertent mistake in submitting information while filing ITR - HELD THAT -Admittedly, the appellant assessee has obtained the tax audit report as required u/s 44AB of the Act on 28.09.2011 and e-filed its e-return of income before due date on 29.09.2011 wherein inadvertently he filled wrong information while filling the columns of audit report. Tax authorities have rejected the said explanation on the reasoning that no audit was made by the appellant as required u/s 44AB and no evidence or submissions are filed whereas such audit report, duly certified by the auditor with the support of an affidavit, has been filed on record. In the affidavit, the auditor has stated the fact that he has prepared the audit report on 28.09.2011 and a copy of said letter was also provided to the bank. Appellant contended that the required audit report as prescribed u/s 44AB was duly obtained by the appellant will within the prescribed time and filed before the authorities below. Thus, it was due to inadvertent mistake occurred in respect of selection of the proper column of the ITR while filing the return of income by the office of the auditor which has been interpreted by the authorities below as if no audit report was obtained by the appellant u/s 44AB of the Act. Meaning thereby that the penalty u/s 271B was levied on wrong premises by the AO. In the present case, on identical facts the appellant assessee at the time of filing of its e-return had inadvertently filled column regarding details of audit u/s 44AB wrongly as No and therefore, in our view, the penalty u/s 271B would not be leviable - we accept the grievance of the appellant as genuine and as such the penalty levied u/s 44AB of the Act is hereby deleted. Assessee appeal allowed. Issues:
The appeal challenges the levy of penalty u/s 271B of the Act for Assessment Year 2011-12 due to an inadvertent mistake in filling the columns in the ITR regarding audit requirements u/s 44AB. Summary: The appellant, an assessee, filed an appeal against the penalty imposed u/s 271B of the Act for not conducting an audit as required u/s 44AB. The appellant's counsel argued that there was a clerical mistake in the ITR columns, leading to the incorrect indication of not being liable for audit u/s 44AB. The audit report was obtained and filed within the prescribed time, supported by an affidavit. The authorities wrongly interpreted the situation, leading to the penalty imposition. The appellant's contention was supported by the case of Sujata Trading (P) Ltd. v. ITO, where a similar situation led to the penalty being set aside. The Tribunal held that since the audit report was obtained before the due date for filing the return, the penalty u/s 271B was unjustified. Similarly, in the present case, the appellant's inadvertent error in filling the audit details column should not result in the penalty imposition. The Tribunal found the lower authorities' decision to sustain the penalty to be incorrect and set it aside. The penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- u/s 271B was deleted, and the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed. The order was pronounced on 11.01.2024 at ITAT Amritsar Bench, Amritsar, under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963.
|
