Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 1389 - AT - Income TaxPenalty u/s. 271G - assessee has entered into an international transactions with its AE and has failed to furnish documents or information as required u/s 92D(3) - main allegation of the revenue is that of non-furnishing of audited AE and non AE segmental as well as documents regarding choice of foreign entity as tested party - HELD THAT:- As noted that from the letter issued by revenue dated 07.09.2015 i.e. notice under section 92CA(2) read with section 92D(3) requiring information to be furnished in connection with the TP proceedings that a general notice is issued by the AO. We noted that this issue has been considered in the case of CIT vs. Leory Somer & Controls (India) (P) Ltd. [2013 (9) TMI 761 - DELHI HIGH COURT] wherein it is held that when there is a general notice and no specific information of document which is required to be submitted by the assessee under section 92D(3) of the Act, is asked for, the penalty levied under section 271G cannot be sustained. We noted that the assessee in the present case has made substantive compliance of the provisions of rule 10D, it is sufficient. The Legislature was conscious of this fact and, therefore, had specifically stipulated in section 92D(3) that the AO or the Commissioner (Appeals) may require a person to furnish any information or document in respect thereof and on failure of the said person to furnish the documentation within the specified time, penalty under section 271G can be imposed. Thus, for imposing penalty the Revenue must first mention the document and information, which was required to be furnished but was not furnished by the assessee within the specified time. The documentation or information should be one specified in rule 10D, which has been formulated in terms of section 92D(1). Assessee has sufficiently complied with the requirement of Rule 10D(i) of the Rules and moreover the AO has not raised any specific issue which specific documents is not produced under section 92D(3), hence, we conclude that the assessee has furnished all the informations as asked for by the AO and unless and until a specific defect is pointed out in the submissions of documents, penalty under section 271G cannot be levied. We delete the penalty and allow the appeal of the assessee.
|