2016 (4) TMI 343 - ITAT JAIPUR
Charat Lal Meena Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sawai Madhopur
Penalty U/s 271B - Failure to get accounts audited - Held that - There is no evidence with the assessee to prove that he got account audited on 14/7/2008 by M/s Vimal Geol & Associates. Now law has been amended and not only the assessee got the account audited but audit report is to be submitted before due date in the office of the Assessing Officer. The assessee s plea is that he has totally dependent on AR for submitting the return as well as audit report but this averment also has not been proved by him with cogent evidence. ....... - .......
2016 (3) TMI 1010 - ITAT JAIPUR
Smt. Anju Haldia Versus The ITO, Ward- - 2 (4) , Jaipur
Penalty u/s 271B - accounts of the assessee from speculative business were not audited u/s 44AB - whether the assessee s speculative transaction on NCDEX can be considered as actual transaction liable for provision of audit u/s 44AB read with Section 271B or they are mere speculative profit and transaction value and the entire notional transaction value cannot be treated as turnover of the assessee? - Held that - ITAT Pune Bench in the case Banwari Sitaram Pasari HUF vs. ACIT 2013 (1) TMI 234 - ITAT PUNE and Growmor Exports Ltd. vs. Asstt. Commissioner (2000 (6) TMI 774 - ITAT MUMBAI) have hel ....... - .......
2015 (12) TMI 392 - ITAT DELHI
Chopra Properties Versus ACIT, Circle-33 (1) , New Delhi
Penalty u/s 271B - assessee has obtained the tax audit report on 30th September 2008 and not before 30th September, 2008 - CIT (A) confirmed penalty holding that assessee has committed a default by not getting its accounts audited before the due date - Held that - The meaning of the word before in section 44AB of the Act is cloudy and uncertain. The word is possible of two meanings, one being the common meaning and the other as given in Chamber s Twentieth Century Dictionary as previous to the expiration of . Looking to the other sections of the Act as above and giving harmonious construction ....... - .......
2015 (11) TMI 735 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Shri Rajkumar Shriram and Shri Babulal Gopiram Versus Income Tax Officer, Ward-2 (3) , Bhavnagar
Penalty u/s. 271B - failure to furnish the audit accounts u/s. 44AB - it is assessee s submission that he was under bona fide belief that he was not required to get the accounts audited in view of CBDT Instruction No. 452 dated 17th March, 1986 and the various decisions relied upon by him - Held that - No material has been placed on record by Revenue to demonstrate that the belief of the Assessee was not a bonafide belief. A reading of Section 271B makes it clear that the imposition of penalty is not mandatory as the word used is may meaning thereby that a discretion is conferred on the A.O to ....... - .......
2015 (8) TMI 329 - ITAT MUMBAI
Prerna Conwood Associates Versus The Income Tax Officer 12 (3) (2) , Mumbai
Computation of income - manner in which income of the assessee is liable to be computed from the development of its project named Pranik Garden at Mahavir Nagar, Kandivali(West), Mumbai - Held that - The project of the assessee was substantially completed in the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. In fact it is seen that the project consisted of construction of Tower-A,B,D & E, Tower Ekata and shopping arcade/parking space. The AO has noticed that except for Tower-B the occupation certificates for all other buildings were received prior to 31/3/2005 and in fa ....... - .......
2015 (10) TMI 1436 - ITAT PANAJI
M/s. Pai Transport Company Versus ITO, Ward-2 (2) , Belgaum
Levy of penalty u/s 271B - Failure to get accounts audited - Held that - Income of the Assessee is basically from commission on transportation. The penalty levied u/s 271B is not a blanket penalty but is subject to the control of Sec. 273B. Thus, the Assessee does have the ground to raise the issue of reasonable cause. The Assessee has explained and shown with evidence that the Assessee is accounting only the commission as its income/turnover in its Profit & Loss account. Admittedly, no defect in its books of accounts have been found to show that the Assessee has done any fraudulent activi ....... - .......
2015 (10) TMI 1507 - ITAT MUMBAI
M/s Precision Shears And Knives Pvt Ltd Versus The ITO, Ward 1 (2) (4) , Mumbai
Penalty u/s. 271B - failure to get accounts audited - Held that - AO had to take permission from the Joint Commissioner before levying the penalty as the amount of penalty exceeded ₹ 10,000/-. There is nothing in the order of the penalty which could show that the ITO has taken prior permission from the Joint Commissioner. When a statute required a thing to be done in a certain manner, it shall be done in that manner alone. When a particular authority has been designated to record his satisfaction on any particular issue, then it is that authority alone who should apply his independent mi ....... - .......
2015 (3) TMI 321 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Sancheti Motors Ltd. Versus The Income Tax Officer, Ward - I(3), Chennai
Penalty under Section 271B - no reasonable cause for delayed filing of the audit report - Held that - In the case on hand, the assessee filed return of income on 27.3.1990 and the audit report was obtained on 27.4.1990 and submitted during the course of the assessment proceedings. The reason given by the assessee for the delay in submitting the audit report was that the books were impounded on 29.12.1989. The retention of seized/impounded books of accounts and documents is evidenced by the letter dated 29.12.1989 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle II-(3), Chenna ....... - .......
2015 (7) TMI 975 - ITAT JAIPUR
Prem Prakash Gupta Versus The ITO., Ward-6 (2) , Jaipur.
Tax Audit - Determination of turnover for the purpose of section 44AB - Penalty u/s 271B - Held that - The sale of stamp papers by licensed vendors is a government assigned function to facilitate the stamp sales at various locations. The government appoints licensed agents which are remunerated at a prescribed fee scale/commission, which is mentioned in the written submissions and the stamp rules. The stamps are sold by the assessee on behalf of the government, which is further reflected by the fact that if the license is cancelled for any reason, all the unsold stamp, stamp papers, seals etc. ....... - .......
2015 (1) TMI 664 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
HATHISING MFG. CO. LTD. Versus CIT
Penalty u/s.271B - Tax Audit Report not submitted within the due date - Held that - Appellant-assessee is a sick unit under the BIFR and could not finalize its Accounts and obtain the Tax Audit Report before 31.03.1994. The assessee had submitted the original Return on the basis of the provisional Balance Sheet and P & L Accounts and revised Return was filed on 04.10.1994 along with the Tax Audit Report. Therefore, there was sufficient cause behind the delay. Tribunal ought not to have reversed the order of CIT(A) whereby, the penalty u/s.271B imposed by the Assessing Officer was quashed a ....... - .......
2014 (12) TMI 440 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Attara Gas Service Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur and another
Sale of gas cylinders to be included in the turnover or not - Whether the sale of gas cylinders by the appellant was liable to be included in the turnover and was required to be audited u/s 44AB Held that - The agreement clearly indicated that the assessee was appointed as a distributor on principal to principal basis for sale of gas cylinders to consumers - assessee was carrying on business of supply of gas cylinders to the consumers and that the assessee was carrying on the business of purchase and sale of gas cylinders and not on a commission basis - the sale of gas cylinders was liable to ....... - .......
2014 (7) TMI 965 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. ECC. Project Pvt. Ltd.
Cancellation of penalty u/s 271B No assessment proceedings pending Failure to record satisfaction by AO - Held that - The satisfaction as to the assessee having concealed the particulars of his income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income is to be arrived at by the AO during the course of any proceedings under the Act, which would mean the assessment proceedings, without which, the jurisdiction to initiate the penalty proceedings is not conferred on the assessing authority by reference to clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 271 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Following the deci ....... - .......
2015 (10) TMI 923 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
M/s. Atmaram Mody & Co. Versus ITO, Ward 11 (4) Ahmedabad
Penalty u/s.271B - Failure to get accounts audited - Held that - Considering the accounting of the assessee the claim of the assessee was not approved, however as far as the question of levy of penalty for non auditing of account being gross receipts have exceeded ₹ 40 lacs, we have noted that some of the commission income pertained to A.Y.2003-04 and part of the income pertained to A.Y. 2004-05 and likewise another part of the income belonged to A.Y. 2005-06. This position of segregation of income for respective years was finally settled by the Respected Co-ordinate Bench. Therefore, th ....... - .......
2015 (10) TMI 1386 - ITAT MUMBAI
Esque Finmark Pvt. Ltd. Versus Asst. CIT-9 (1) , Mumbai
Penalty u/s.271B - non furnishing of tax audit report u/s 44AB - determination of turnover - Held that - The notice of penalty and the basis for the A.O. in levying the penalty was that the assessee s work-in-process (WIP) had witnessed an increase during the year for an amount beyond the prescribed limit. Though, therefore, we do not regard the ld. CIT(A) to have, in confirming the penalty, based it on a different cause; the default being the same, it does amount to a different view being adopted on the same set of facts, confirming the view, if one was required, that the matter is liable to ....... - .......
2014 (7) TMI 594 - ITAT MUMBAI
Sujata Trading Private Limited Versus Income Tax Officer
Audit report obtained u/s 44AB of the Act Wrong information given to AO - Whether the statement of the assessee that it has obtained the tax audit report prior to filing of return is correct or not Held that - The corporate assessees have to furnish Tax audit report in Form 3CA and Form No.3CD - The non-corporate assessees have to furnish the tax audit report in Form 3CB and Form 3CD - it requires the tax auditor only to furnish the details of audit conducted under the Companies Act - the assessee has filed the return of income under E filing procedure - Part A-O1 of the return of income requi ....... - .......