New User / Regiser - Forget password
Free Services / Demo
M/s. Hridey Vikram, Versus Assistan Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 22(1), New Delhi. - 2012 (10) TMI 852 - ITAT, DELHI - Income Tax
Penalty u/s 271B - assessee had not got its account audited u/s 44AB - Held that - As decided in ACIT Versus Smt. Bharti Sharma 2010 (7) TMI 494 - ITAT, NEW DELHI the assessee cannot be penalized for the act for which there is no failure on his/her part - for the purpose of sec. 44AB, turnover of all the businesses has to be considered but the provisions of sec. 271B will be pressed in operation in respect of the failure only and not in respect of accounts which have been audited. Setting aside .......