Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (5) TMI

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uiring the assessee to file SFT within the due date as prescribed u/s 285BA(1) of the Act read with Rule 114E of the Income Tax Rules. We noticed that penalty were levied ignoring the submissions of the assessee that there are no reportable transaction and therefore the provision of Section 285BA(1) of the Act are not applicable simply because the assessee did not file return of SFT. As relying on M/S GUNTUR DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LTD. [ 2019 (2) TMI 43 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM] we are of the view that the assessee had a bonafide belief that no return is required to be filed when there are no reportable transactions which is a reasonable cause u/s 273B of the Act for not levying the penalty u/s 271FA - Assessing Officer is not justi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... it is reported in the Audit Report that Assessee is not required to furnish statement in Form No.- 61, Form No.- 61A or Form No.- 61B. Therefore, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the assessee do not have any reportable transaction u/s 285BA(1) read with Rule 114E of the Income Tax Rules and therefore no return has been filed. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further referring to the penalty order submits that, nowhere the Assessing Officer referred to any reportable transaction of the assessee, Assessing Officer has not identified any reportable transaction relating to the assessee. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that the CIT(A) has erred in sustaining the penalty observing that even if there were no reportable transactio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g decisions for the proposition that penalty proceedings u/s 271FA of the Act should not be invoked for not filing return and non filing of return is only technical or venial breach and it was only a bonafide belief of the assessee that it was not required to file return when there are no reportable transactions. 1. Jhalawar Kendriya Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. Additional / Assistant Director of Income-tax (I CI) Jaipur [2023] 150 taxmann.com 366 (Jaipur-Trib.) 2. Durgapur Steel People s Cooperarive Bank Ltd. vs. Director of Income-tax (Intelligence Criminal Investigatiion ). Kolkata * [2016] 74 taxmann.com 97 (Kolkata-Trib.) 3. M/s Kesar Alloys Metals Pvt. Ltd. v. The Director of Income Tax (I CI), Bhopal ITA No. 337/Del/2022. 6. On the other ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ime being in force, shall furnish an annual information return, in respect of such specified financial transaction which is registered or recorded by him during any financial year beginning on or after the 1st day of April, 2004 and information relating to which is relevant and required for the purposes of this Act, to the prescribed income-tax authority or such other authority or agency as may be prescribed. The return has to be filed by a person who has recorded the transaction and person who fails to furnish such return within time period prescribed u/s 285BA(2) of the Act, shall be liable to pay penalty u/s 271FA of the Act for a sum of Rs. 100/- for everyday during the period which the failure continues. Combined reading of section 271 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... A of the Act, the assessee is not obliged to file the AIR and levy of penalty u/s 271FA is unjustified. Accordingly, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities and cancel the penalties imposed u/s 271FA for the A.Y. 2011-12 and 2012-13. The appeals of the assessee for the F.Y. 2010-11 and 2011-12 are allowed. 9. This decision applies to the facts of the assessee s case. Even otherwise, we are of the view that the assessee had a bonafide belief that no return is required to be filed when there are no reportable transactions which is a reasonable cause u/s 273B of the Act for not levying the penalty u/s 271FA of the Act. Thus, in our considered view, the Assessing Officer is not justified in levying penalty u/s 271FA of the Act and we d .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates