9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ach without any mala fide intention of the assessee, the penalty cannot be levied u/s 271B. Respectfully following the above decision of case of Balaji Logistics v. ACIT [ 2022 (9) TMI 1432 - ITAT CHENNAI] it is not a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271B and penalty levied u/s 271B stands deleted - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A. Nos. 49, 50, 51 And 52/Chny/2023 - - - Dated:- 23-6-2023 - Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member And Shri Arun Khodpia, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Ms. A. Vijayalakshmi, C.A. For the Respondent : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT ORDER PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: These four appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate but identical orders of the ld. Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 2,79,71,854/-, ₹. 3,06,02,197/-, ₹. 2,79,08,712/- and ₹. 2,74,40,477/- respectively, the assessee was required to get their accounts audited and liable to file the tax audit report as required under section 44AB of the Act before the due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. As the assessee has not filed the tax audit report within due date, the Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under section 271B of the Act levied penalty of ₹. 1,39,859/-, ₹. 1,50,000/-, ₹. 1,39,543/- and ₹. 1,37,202/- for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 2016-17 respectively under section 271B of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the penalty levied under section 271B of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as required under section 44AB of the Act before the due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. Since the assessee has not filed the tax audit report under section 44AB of the Act before the due date, the Assessing Officer levied penalty under section 271B of the Act, which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). Before us, it was submitted that the assessee was unable to file the ROI along with tax audit report within the date stipulated in the notice under section 148 of the Act due to Covid pandemic lock down and income tax portal was under maintenance, and the assessee has filed the tax audit report under section 44AB of the Act during the course of assessment proceedings, which was also considered by the Assessing Officer before co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idered by the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. T P D 101 Uthangarai Milk Producers Co-operative Society Ltd.(supra), where on identical set of facts, penalty levied u/s.271B of the Act, has been deleted. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are as under: 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The assessee supposed to have been filed audit report as required u/s.44AB of the Act, on or before 31.10.2015. However, such audit report has been filed on 05.03.2016, which is before the date of completion of assessment proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Act. In other words, although the assessee has filed tax audit report beyond the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al technical breach without any mala fide intention, penalty cannot be levied. The ITAT Cochin Bench in ITA No.411/Cochin/2018 vide order dated 05.02.2019 had held that once audit report has been made available before the AO, when the assessment proceedings were completed, then, there is no reason for levy of penalty. 8. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that reasons given by the assessee for not filing tax audit report within due date comes under reasonable cause as provided u/s.271B of the Act, and thus, the AO is erred in levying penalty u/s.271B of the Act. Hence, we direct the AO to delete penalty levied u/s.271B of Act. . 7. In this view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
