Income Tax : Explore how seizure of documents can impact audit deadlines under Section 44AB and defenses against Section 271B penalties for aud...
Income Tax : Dive into Section 271B's mandates, penalties, and exemptions under the Income Tax Act. Explore real cases, challenges, and strateg...
Income Tax : Explore recent ITAT judgment in Rakesh Kr. Jha vs. ITO, delving into interpretation of Sections 271A and 271B, highlighting confli...
Income Tax : Learn about the penalties and prosecutions under the Income Tax Act of 1961 for various defaults and offenses. Find out the fines ...
Income Tax : Apart from penalty for various defaults, the Income-tax Act also contains provisions for launching prosecution proceedings against...
Income Tax : All Odisha Tax Advocates Association has filed an PIl before Orissa High Court with following Prayers- (i) Admit the Writ Petition...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai cancels ₹1 lakh penalty imposed on Sameer Mavji Patel under Section 271B for delayed tax audit report, citing reason...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai confirmed penalty imposed under section 271B of the Income Tax Act for non-furnishing audit report, in absence of any...
Income Tax : Read the full text of the order from ITAT Agra where penalty u/s 271B was deleted for Tasavver Husain vs ITO. Detailed analysis an...
Income Tax : Detailed analysis of the appeal against a penalty imposed under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act by the ITAT Delhi in the case o...
Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT sets aside penalty under section 271B, citing previous penalty under section 271A for non-maintenance of accounts in H...
Addition made by AO during the assessment proceedings on the basis of unaccounted sales cannot be regarded as the turnover for the purpose of section 44AB of the Act because the documents relied upon by AO are neither the part of books of account nor would substitute the books of account or constitute the books of account of the assessee regularly maintained.
Sri. Abdul Azeez M Vs ACIT (ITAT Cochin) Admittedly in this case, no audit report has been filed for assessment year 2009-2010. It is the contention of the assessee that there was a reasonable cause as mandated u/s 273B of the I.T.Act. It was submitted by the learned AR that consequent to search and seizure […]
Penalty under Section 271B was justified as assessee had not produced audit report in the prescribed format before AO and no explanation regarding the reasonable cause for not filing the audit report within the prescribed time limit was given.
M/s. PMC Rubber Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Kolkata) We note that the assessee has filed form no. 3CD and 3CB and the same has not been disputed therefore the tax audit report was on record and hence the penalty should not be levied. However the Assessing Officer disputed that instead of form […]
Assessee assailed the imposition of penalty under section 271B imposed by AO on account of failure to get accounts audited under section 44AB. Assessee contended that penalty was not justified as no books of account were maintained by assessee.
Where assessee, in order to get a bank loan, submitted a bogus audit report from CA and showed fake turnover in his return of income, imposition of penalty under section 271B for non-compliance of section 44AB was justified.
Where there is a delay in completion of statutory audit, there exist a reasonable cause for the delay in completion of tax audit and issuance of tax audit report.
M/s. Johns Biwheelers Vs. ACIT (ITAT Cochin) In this case, the assessee was required to get his books of account audited and filed along with the return of income u/s. 44AB within the due date of 30/09/2013 for the assessment year 2013-14. However, the audit report was furnished only on 28/03/2014. The contention of the […]
The assessee had not filed the audit report in this case. The assessee was very casual and did not enter appearance for the show cause notice issued for imposition of penalty. The assessee has not made out a reasonable cause as mentioned u/s 273B of the I.T.Act for non-furnishing of audit report u/s 44AB of the I.T.Act. Hence, we are of the view that the penalty u/s 271B of the I.T.Act has been rightly imposed. It is ordered accordingly.
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 […]
