TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty of Rs. 52,290 imposed under s. 271B of the Act by AO especially when the assessee has not filed the audit report as prescribed under s. 44AB of the Act within the stipulated time under law." 2.1 Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee filed its return for asst. yr. 1991-92 on 31st Dec., 1991, on a total income o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had been given for not filing the audited report within the time allowed under s. 139(1) of the Act, the AO imposed penalty under s. 271B of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) deleted the penalty by observing, thus: "In the case under appeal, the return was filed after the due date under s. 139(1). No notice under s. 142(1) appears to have been issued to the assessee by the AO. The return was file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R (All) 512 : (2000) 245 ITR 857 (All), wherein the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has held, thus: "The obligation created by s. 44AB of the IT Act, 1961, as it stood prior to 1st July, 1995, was merely to get the accounts audited before the specified date. There was no obligation to furnish that audit report before the AO before the specified date. This obligation has been created by substitutin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
