9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1820X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utset, the learned AR submitted that survey was conducted on the premises of assessee on 16.06.2009 and documents were seized and therefore, the assessee was not able to get his books of account audited by 30.09.2009. He further submitted that the assessee vide letter dated 12.08.2009, 2.2.2010 and 1.06.2010 had requested for release of documents and in this respect he invited our attention to paper book page 2,3 and 4 where copies of letters dated 12.08.2009, 2.02.2010 and 1.06.2010 were placed. The learned AR submitted that the finding of learned CIT(A) that assessee had not applied for release of documents before 01.06.2010 is not correct as it is apparent from the copies of letters written to Assessing Officer for release of documents. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... time and delay was bonafide and hence penalty was not leviable. I have considered the rival submissions and find that the appellant did not apply for Xerox copy before 01/06/2010 and hence cannot claim that delay was bonafide. The Appellant was provided the Xerox copy before 01/06/2010 and hence cannot claim that delay was bonafide. The appellant was provided the Xerox copy on 14/07/2010 and as per record he got his account audited on 05.01.2011. The onus to get his account audited was on the appellant as per the statutory provisions u/s 44AB and the appellant should have taken the Xerox copies well in time from the department which was not done. The appellant had three clear months to get photocopies and accounts audited which was not a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... audited in respect of any previous year or years relevant to an assessment year or to furnish the audit report as per the requirement of s. 44AB. However, there is nothing in the language of that section from which it can be inferred that levy of penalty is mandatory in all cases of non-compliance with s. 44AB and that in no case, the AO can accept the cause shown by the assessee. Rather, the use of the expression 'reasonable cause' [this expression was omitted by the Taxation Laws (Amendment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1986] and the work 'may' shows that it is only an enabling provisions and the AO is not under an obligation to impose penalty in each and every case ignoring the explanation given by the assessee or cause shown by it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
