TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 157X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ews papers for recovery of ₹.29.60 crores as on 31.01.2022 plus interest till the date of settlement. Considering the pathetic condition of the assessee as well as by following various case law, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that the books of accounts audited, though belatedly, but the audit report was produced before the Assessing Officer before completion of the assessment. Since the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause for not getting her books of accounts audited in time as required under the provisions of section 44AB of the Act, but filed the tax audit report before completion of the assessment, the ld. CIT(A) has held that it is not a fit case for the levy of penalty under section 271B of the Act and accordingly, the pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee and in view of the provisions of section 271B of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied penalty of ₹.1,50,000/-. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) deleted the penalty levied under section 271B of the Act. 3. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. The Department has not complied with the defect notice issued by the Tribunal for filing of grounds of appeal before the ITAT. However, the ld. DR supported the penalty levied under section 271B of the Act. 4. None appeared on behalf of the assessee and hence we proceed to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the ld. DR. 5. We have heard the ld. DR, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the appellant. Further, the dire financial condition of the appellant appears to be a reasonable cause for the appellant not getting the audit completed within the stipulated time. It is not the case of the AO that the appellant has deliberately and wilfully contravened the provisions of the law. Taking the totality of facts and circumstances of the case in account, I am of the considered view that there existed compelling reasons for the appellant to not get her accounts audited in time as required under the provisions of section 44AB. Therefore, I hold this to be not a fit case for the levy of penalty u/s 271 B of the Act. The penalty is accordingly ordered to be deleted. 6. By filing detailed year-wise sales turnover of assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
