Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Precision Shears And Knives Pvt Ltd Versus The ITO, Ward 1 (2) (4) , Mumbai

2015 (10) TMI 1507 - ITAT 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 satis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to be set aside. We direct the AO to delete the penalty so levied. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 6606/Mum2011 - Dated:- 20-5-2015 - Joginder Singh, JM And N. K. Billaiya, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Vimal Punmiya For the Respondent : Shri Neil Philip ORDER Per N K Billaiya, AM. This is an appeal by the assessee directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Mumbai dt. 12.7.2011 pertaining to assessment year 2000- 01. 2. The sole grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s account audited, the penalty proceedings u/s. 271B of the Act was initiated. An opportunity was given to the assessee to show cause as to why penalty should not be levied u/s. 271B of the Act. On receiving no plausible reply, the AO proceeded by levying penalty at ₹ 77,927/-. 4. Aggrieved by this, the assessee carried the matter before the Ld. CIT(A) but without any success. 5. Before us, Ld. Counsel for the assessee brought to our notice that the quantum additions have been restored to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

partmental Representative supported the orders of the authorities below. 7. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below and the judicial decisions relied upon by the Ld. Counsel. The undisputed fact is that the Enforcement Directorate took action against the assessee on 29.12.2012 taking away all the papers, books and vouchers etc. It is also a fact that Director of the Company was arrested. The issue before us is can this be considered a reasonable and suffic .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essee had grossly failed to get its books of account audited on or before the due date i.e. 30.11.2000 much before the books and other documents were impounded by Enforcement Directorate. The assessee fails on this ground. 8. Before us, the Ld. Counsel has relied upon certain judicial decisions (supra) in support of his contention that quantum additions have been set aside therefore no penalty is leviable. We do not agree with this contention of the Ld. Counsel because levy of penalty u/s. 271B .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version