TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t a medical doctor into a business woman. Running a nursing home by her alone is a part of the medical profession. It is a different way of conducting her medical profession. Further, we find it is not the case of the assessee that she received salary from a hospital and there is no service agreement to support such an arrangement. Therefore, on this limited issue, we are of the considered opinion that the assessee is covered by provisions of section 44AA of the Act. Appellant is a Gynecologist and also runs proprietary concern named as Indira Maternity Home. There is no difference between the professional receipt of an individual and professional receipt of her proprietary concern as basically she is a professional. Therefore, it cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹ 62,62,196/- after making addition on account of long term capital gain on transfer of development rights of the property. Further, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee s accounts are not audited despite the eligible turnover of professional receipts. No audit report is submitted. Therefore, the Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings and issued the notice u/s 271B of the Act. In the penalty proceedings u/s 271B of the Act, the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 44AB of the Act and imposed the penalty of ₹ 16,376/- which is equal to one half percent of the gross total receipts of the assessee. Against the said penalty order of the Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counts of the assessee were audited u/s 44AA of the Act. Ld. DR submitted that assessee s turnover, being ₹ 32,75,261/-, attracts the provisions of section 44AB r.w.s. 271B of the Act. 7. We heard both the sides on this limited issue i.e. if the assessee is a medical professional or a business woman. We also examined the facts surrounding the assessee. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee is a qualified doctor, a Gynecologist and Anesthetist. She runs a nursing home. It is also admitted fact that the assessee attends to the patients and treats them in OPD and others. Therefore, mere running a nursing home/hospital does not convert a medical doctor into a business woman. Running a nursing home by her alone is a part of the med ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue was regarding clubbing of income in case of professional couple carrying out profession in their capacity as professionals. Therefore, the appellant cannot rely on the decision of Hon ble Gujarat High court in her support. The appellant has also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Hyderabad ITAT in the case of Shalini Hospitals vs ACIT. In this case, it is seen that facts are not identical in the sense that the nursing home was run by a personal firm and any of receipt was only of room rents, OT rents and Pre and Post Operation nursing care. While professionals fee was charged by Doctors and Surgeons directly from patients. Therefore, reliance of the appellant on the above decision is also misplaced. In this case, it is clear from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
