TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 719X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hence, there is no reason to initiate penalty u/s 271B. The penalty for non-maintenance of books of accounts has already been rightly levied, hence the offence has already been taken note of and the only recourse is to levy penalty u/s 271A for non-compliance of Section 44AA. These two provisions operate under two different realms. Thus the penalty levied by the AO as confirmed by the ld. CIT (A) be obliterated. With regard to the arguments of the ld. DR that owing to the difference in the penalties, it prima facie encourages non- maintenance of books of accounts, at this juncture, we refrain ourselves from trespassing the domain of legislature as to the difference of the quantum of penalty leviable u/s 271A and 271B. - Decided in fav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. The AO held that the threshold limit thus determined is not correct and assessee is liable to get the books audited owing to the turnover of more than ₹ 60,00,000/- in accordance with the provisions of Section 44AB. The AO also held that during the survey operation and during the assessment proceedings, assessee has accepted that he is into the business of trading of aluminum sheets and hence auditing of the books of accounts is a statutory requirement. 6. Aggrieved the assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT (A). During the proceedings before the ld. CIT (A), the assessee submitted that the AO has already imposed penalty u/s 271A of ₹ 25,000/- for non-maintenance of books of accounts. It was argued before the ld. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the records that the assessee failed to maintain the books of accounts as required under section 44AA and for that penalty is prescribed under section 271A. CIT Vs S.K. Gupta and Co. 322 ITR 86 (All.) held, the submission (of counsel for revenue ) is misconceived for the reason that the requirement of getting the books of accounts audited could arise only where the books of accounts are maintained. If for some reason the assessee has not maintained the books of accounts the appropriate provision under which penalty proceedings can be initiated is under section 271A of the Act which recourse has also been taken by the assessee as would appear from the order of the Tribunal. CIT Vs Bisauli Tractors 299 ITR 219 (All.) after hearing the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 71B for failure to get the accounts audited, if the proposition as canvassed by the ld. AR is accepted it will only encourage the assessees for non-maintenance of books of accounts and getting away with a minor penalty of ₹ 25,000/- instead of ₹ 1,50,000/-. 10. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 11. We find that the decision of the ld. CIT (A) that the legislature is clear about maintenance of books of accounts and as well as getting the books audited is acceptable to the extent that there has been a twin responsibility casted up on the shoulders of the assessee to, a) Maintain the books of accounts u/s 44AA, b) To get the accounts audited u/s 44AB. 12. At the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
