TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1436X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reight payable’ account is separately maintained which contains the details of the ‘Freight payable’ which is received by the Assessee and which is disbursed by the Assessee. This being so, the claim of the Assessee that he was under reasonable and bona fide belief that his turnover did not exceed ₹ 40 lacs is clearly a bona fide claim on which no penalty is leviable u/s 271B. In the circumstances, the penalty levied u/s 271B by the AO, and as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) stands deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA NOS. 46 & 248/PNJ/2014 - - - Dated:- 18-6-2015 - SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, HON BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Assessee : V.K. Gurunathan, Adv. For The R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ht payable account separately and the same was directly paid to the various truck operators. It was the submission that the Assessee was of the bona fide belief that as the Assessee s turnover represented only the commission and the same was below the prescribed limit of ₹ 40 lacs, the Assessee had not got its books of accounts audited. It was the submission that the AO had considered the Freight payable account also and had treated the Assessee as having violated the provisions of Sec. 44AB as the total turnover exceeded ₹ 40 lacs. It was the submission that that the Freight payable account did not belong to the Assessee insofar as the Assessee was exclusively a commission agent for transportation of goods. It was the subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payable which is received by the Assessee and which is disbursed by the Assessee. This being so, the claim of the Assessee that he was under reasonable and bona fide belief that his turnover did not exceed ₹ 40 lacs is clearly a bona fide claim on which no penalty is leviable u/s 271B. 6. Coming to the finding of the ld. CIT(A) that the Assessee s case is similar to the decision in the case of Mukesh Choksi referred to supra, we find that, that was a case where accommodation entries were being provided. The business of accommodation entry itself requires funds to be brought in and ploughed out. Clearly, that was a case of absolute fraud on the Revenue, which under those circumstances had been held against the Assessee. In the pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
