Case Law Details
Md. Salim Qurasi Vs ITO (ITAT Kolkata)
We have heard rival submissions. From the papers available on the record including the paper book of the assessee, we find that the assessee had got his accounts tax audited for the Assessment Year 2013-14, on 27/09/2013.We find that the same has been filed before the ld. Assessing Officer before the completion of the assessment proceedings. This is evident from the certificate of paper book filed by the assessee before us, wherein it is stated that the tax audit report for the Assessment Year 2013-14, have been duly filed before the ld. Assessing Officer as well as the ld. CIT(A). Hence this is a case of tax audit report obtained before the due date of filing of the return of income but filed before the ld. Assessing Officer before the completion of the assessment proceedings.
Now, the short question that arises is whether in this scenario penalty u/s 271B of the Act, can be levied or not. In our considered opinion, the assessee had only committed a technical venial breach without creating any loss to the exchequer. In the instant case, the tax audit report was very much made available before the ld. Assessing Officer before the completion of the assessment proceedings.
Asessee had committed only technical venial breach for which he could not be penalised. In view of the aforesaid observation and respectively following the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. A.N. Arunachalam (supra), we direct the ld. Assessing Officer to delete the penalty levied u/s 271B of the Act.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.