ITAT deletes Section 271B penalty imposed by AO on commission agent

Bablu Kumar Harinarayan Gupta Vs ITO (ITAT Pune) ITAT held that it is not fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271B merely because the appellant was unable to substantiate the submission that the appellant is only commission agent because there is no obligation on the part of the assessee to get the accounts audited as he was under the bona-fide belief that it is only commission receipt, which can be considered as turnover for the purpose of section 44AB of the Act. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to delete the penalty u/s 271B of the Act. FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT PUNE These are...