9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ") relevant to the Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: "1. The penalty order u/s. 271B of the Act is bad in law. 2. The learned Assessing Officer has erred in law as well as on facts in levying the penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- u/s. 271B of the Act. The learned CIT(A) has erred in passing the ex-parte order and confirming the said penalty levied by the ld. A.O." 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT -A erred in confirming the penalty levied by the AO for @1.50 lakhs under the provisions of section 271B of the Act. 4. In the present case, the assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of dairy products. The assessee has obtained agency from Gujarat Cooperat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accounts and get the same audited. But the tax was already paid with interest to the Government Exchequer. It was also submitted that the assessee is a semi-literate man and he was under bona-fide belief that his net margin i.e. 1.5% of the turnover would be considered as his gross receipt/ turnover instead of his total sales. 7. However, it was observed by the Ld. CIT(A) that the appellant's contention that he is a semi- literate layman and not much conversant with the provisions of Income Tax Laws cannot be a reason for non- compliance. An ordinary man doing such a huge business and turnover would necessary require to consult an expert to meet his statutory compliance and obligations under the Income Tax Act. The minimum penalty amounti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when assessee makes default in compliance of the provisions of Income Tax Act. The Act has introduced various penalties for contraventions committed by taxpayers. The penalty prescribed as per the Income Tax Act can either be mandatory or leviable at the discretion of a tax authority. So in penalty proceedings the conduct of the assessee is very important. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Ltd Vs. State of Orissa 83 ITR 26 held that penalty should not be imposed unless the assessee acted deliberately. An order imposing the penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi-criminal proceeding, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged, either acted deliberately in defiance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of income was accepted by the revenue without making any addition and disallowance. Likewise, the assessee has also furnished the tax audit report before the completion of the assessment. In such facts and circumstances, it appears that the book results shown by the assessee were substantially accepted by the revenue as genuine and the compliance was made by the assessee with some delay. The delay has also been explained by the assessee that it was the 1st year of the business. Considering, all the facts stated above, we are not inclined to uphold the findings of the authorities below. Accordingly, we set-aside the finding of the learned CIT-A and direct the AO to delete the penalty by him. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is her ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
