Vardhabhai Jethabhai Patel Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
In the matter abovementioned ITAT deleted imposition of penalty after observing that report u/s 44AB was filed belatedly
The assessee filed return of income for AY 2012-13 at income of Rs.3,57,350/-. The case was reopened on receipt of the information that assessee has received contract receipt u/s.194C to the tune of Rs.1,32,30,498/-. After recording the reasons for reopening of the case and obtaining necessary approval the case was re-opened u/s.147 and reassessment was completed at Rs. 13,23,50,000/- u/s 143(3) r.w.s 147 after making addition of Rs.9,65,700/- on account of profit earned on contract receipt. During the reassessment proceedings, the AO observed that the assessee was required to get the accounts Audited in accordance with the provisions of section 44AB, as the gross receipt exceeds the limit of Rs.60,00,000/- as per the time limit provided in the Act. The assessee failed to get his account Audited as mentioned by the AO and therefore committed defect u/s.24AB of the Act and liable to be pay penalty u/s.271B of the Act and imposed the penalty of Rs.66,152/-. Appeal filed by before CIT (A) was dismissed.
It was submitted before ITAT that assessee has audited his books of accounts and duly received from the auditors and the same has been filed with ITR as per requirement of section 44AB. Assessee has not violated the provision of the Act u/s 271B as the assessee has Audited his accounts as per the provisions of section 44AB within the stipulated time but only filed the same belatedly. Thus, CIT(A) should have accepted the Audit report. On the other hand, revenue submitted that assessee belatedly filed the Audit report on 26.03.2013 while return of income was filed on 30.09.2012. He relied upon the assessment order and CIT (A) order.
