9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 268X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder s. 271B of the Act on 14th Sept., 2004. 2. The facts of this issue are that the assessee is medical practitioner and is also a proprietor of Surana Clinic and Diagnostic Centre. He showed receipts of Rs. 70,492 from patients treated by him by way of fees; Rs. 4,88,221 from pathological laboratory; and Rs. 8,60,832 from sales of medicines, totalling to Rs. 14,19,596. The assessee did not get ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n record. 4. It has been submitted before us that the assessee has been maintaining separate records for professional receipts, pathological receipts and sale of medicines. According to learned Authorised Representative, if these receipts are taken under profession and from the business separately, the provisions of s. 44AB are not attracted. In the alternative, it has been submitted that the ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee is a medical practitioner. As per written submission filed on behalf of the assessee, he is an ayurvedic doctor and has no knowledge of allopathy, leave aside pathological analysis, and he has three types of receipts-(1) from treatment of patient, (2) from pathological laboratory and (3) from the sales of medicines. Since, we are dealing with the penalty proceedings and the facts avai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason for the impugned default and the assessee was prevented by this advice, which constituted a reasonable cause in the eyes of the law and in the favour of the assessee. 7. We are convinced that the assessee was acting as per the advice of the advocate in good faith and the issue. involved in this case with regard to the nature of receipts is a debatable one. The advice given by the counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
