9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 433X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Dated:- 31-1-2017 - Bhagchand (Accountant Member) For the Assessee : Written Submission For the Revenue : Poonam Rai, DCIT- DR ORDER Bhagchand (Accountant Member) The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Ajmer dated 13-06-2016 for the assessment year 2013-14 regarding confirming the penalty of ₹ 83,574/- u/s 271B r.w.s. 274 by the ld. CIT(A). 2.1 Apropos solitary ground of the assessee, the facts as emerges from the order of the ld. CIT(A) is as under:- 4.3 I have gone through the penalty order, statement of facts, grounds of appeal and written submission carefully. It is seen that the appellant has not been able to show that it had filed the audit report obtained u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . He added the name of the concerned auditor to the Income tax Potal for submission of the tax audit report and now it was the turn of the auditor to file the audit report online under his digital signature and it was not in the control of the assessee to do anything further in this regard. However, the auditor failed to file the Audit Report online when the fact of non-filing of auditors report came to assessee's notice, it was explained by the auditors to him that it was first time when the Audit Report u/s 44AB was to be filed on line under his DSC and the software utility was being update very frequently by the IT Department and there had been occurring some technical problems in fling the eaudit report online and it was understood ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the auditors during this Digital Signatures and he had no control in this process. 7. The above facts were also explained to the AO and the ld. CIT(A) which have elaborately been reproduced in para 4.2 of the order of the ld. CIT(A) and remained undisputed by the authorities below as well as by the assessee, the penalty was imposed by the AO irrespective of the above facts that proves the bona fide of the assessee. The penalty was sustained by the ld. CIT(A) under the plea that the assessee could not produce the evidence to support that the report could not be uploaded for technical reasons, though it remained unconsidered that it was not the fault or misconduct by the assessee, it was not filed by the auditor for whatsoever reason, fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oaded. However, the assessee had filed the tax audit report dated 12-06-2013 before the AO. It is also noticed that the assessee being low educated and she was not aware of the e-filing system particularly uploading of audit report on internet as it was first time introduced by the Department to upload the same. It appears that it is a technical breach on the part of the assessee as the audit report could not upload on account of site/ server problem of the system. The ld. AR of the assessee relied on various case laws which have been taken into consideration. The ld. AR of the assessee taking the support of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of ACIT Anr vs. Dr. K. Satish Shetty (2009) 310 ITR 366 submitted that that this is fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
