9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1590X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted 03/08/2016 passed by the ld CIT(A)-I, Jaipur for the A.Y. 2013-14. The only issue involved in this appeal is against sustaining the penalty U/s 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as the Act) levied for Rs. 82,360/- for not filing the audit report U/s 44AB of the Act. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee e-filed his return of income declaring total inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the audited accounts were also to be uploaded alongwith the return of income. The provisions in Rule 12(2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short the Rules) were effective from 01/4/2013. The auditor of the assessee Mr. Aditya Kumar Rawat (CA) completed the audit on 24/09/2013 and filed the return on 28/09/2013. The date of the audit report was also filled in the ITR-4 form. However, the auditor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he was getting his audit completed regularly in time in the last many years, therefore, penalty should not have been levied. 5. On the contrary, the ld DR has relied on the orders of the authorities below. She also pleaded that the levy of penalty should be sustained. 6. I have heard both the parties and perused the material available on the record. Rule 12(2) of the Rules was made effective fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ited well in time regularly since last three years. The audit for the financial year relevant to assessment year under consideration was completed on 24/09/2013 in time and the assessee submitted its return on 28/09/2013. Therefore, in my considered view, the default on the part of the assessee was a bonafide human mistake. There was no dishonest attempt to break the law. Considering the various c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
