9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t (for short, 'the Act') for the assessment year 2005-2006 on the ground of delay of three months in not filing returns as contemplated under Section 271B of the Act. It is not in dispute that appellant is a partnership firm dealing in Welding Electrodes, industrial tools and other equipments. Though the appellant has filed return of income for the assessment year concerned on 30.1.2006 declaring a total income of 9,30,230/- and after completion of the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act accepting the return of income filed by the appellant on account of delay of three months in submitting the return, penalty came to be imposed totally rejecting the explanation given by the assessee, is the case of the appellant before us. Against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted accounts in the branch office at USA for the entire period of delay. Once the explanation appears to be bona fide, the same satisfies the test of reasonableness. Consequently, the cause for the delay being reasonable, the Revenue cannot reject the same and impose penalty, as the same is still protected under Section 273B of the Act and more particularly, when such a delay has not reflected any loss to the revenue, as it is nothing but technical in nature." 4. It is not in dispute that the appellant was consistent in a stand so far as the sufficient cause for the delay in filing the audit report, i.e., the absence of the accountant of the firm. According to them, only by the end of December, 2005, they could finalise the accounts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s alone have to be considered. Apparently, the three authorities, who had the opportunity of looking into the factual situation in the present case, have consistently opined that there was no reasonable cause. Even otherwise the cause shown is only for a part of the assessment year, i.e., before 31.12.2005. There is nothing on record to show during what spells of 2005 the accountant was on leave and for how many days. There is also nothing on record to show whether there is any other assistant to the accountant who said to have been on leave so far as the assessee's partnership firm. Apart from that, the cause for the delay is the absence of accountant on various dates, therefore, they could not finalise the accounts in order to file the au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
