9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) is justified in cancelling the penalty imposed by the AO u/s 271AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "Act"). "I have perused the observations of the Assessing Officer and the written submission filed by the appellant. On plain reading of the provisions as contained in section 271AA, I find that, under the said provisions as applicable to the assessment year in question, the assessee was liable to penalty only if assessee failed to keep and maintain any such information and document as required by sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of section 92D." On going through the relevant provisions of sub section (1) and sub section (2) of section 92D I find that the assessee was obliged to keep and maintain such information and document in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. With regard to the treatment of a penal provision as automatic, I cannot again find myself in agreement with the AO. Both of the above issues have a plethora of authorities -several quoted by the appellant himself - commenting authoritatively on them. Let us now address the portion of the issue that has a direct bearing upon the result of the present appeal. The "No" mentioned above has been belied by the overwhelming amount of evidence that the appellant had substantively complied with the provisions of section 92D as presented above. The appellant had also undeniably produced the concerned documents within the stipulated period of thirty days from the date that they had been asked for by the AO. The only issue that remains is whethe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present case as there was no condition report of the international transaction by the assessee. The AO proceeded to impose penalty of Rs. 65,71,972/- vide its order dated 30.09.2014. The CIT(A) considering the submissions of the assessee discussed the provision u/s 271AA of the Act as it stood relevant to the year under consideration and its substitution thereafter w.e.f. 01.04.2014. We find that it was rightly pointed out by the Ld.AR that the entire provision was substituted vide Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 01.07.2012 thereby prima facie the said provision is not applicable to the present case. It is also noted that the AO primarily imposed penalty u/s 271AA of the Act only on the condition that the assessee reported "no international tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
