Follow Us :

Section 271B

Latest Articles


A Critical Appreciation of Ranchi Bench of ITAT in Rakesh Kr. Jha vs. ITO

Income Tax : Explore recent ITAT judgment in Rakesh Kr. Jha vs. ITO, delving into interpretation of Sections 271A and 271B, highlighting confli...

November 29, 2023 1272 Views 0 comment Print

Penalties and Prosecutions Under Income tax Act, 1961

Income Tax : Learn about the penalties and prosecutions under the Income Tax Act of 1961 for various defaults and offenses. Find out the fines ...

July 25, 2023 472215 Views 4 comments Print

Prosecutions and Punishment under Income Tax Act, 1961

Income Tax : Apart from penalty for various defaults, the Income-tax Act also contains provisions for launching prosecution proceedings against...

June 11, 2022 46278 Views 7 comments Print

Income Tax Offences liable to prosecution

Income Tax : Apart from levy of penalty for various defaults by the taxpayer, the Income-tax Law also contains provisions for launching prosecu...

June 8, 2022 56741 Views 4 comments Print

Power of Commissioner to Reduce or Waive Income Tax Penalty

Income Tax : In the tutorial on Penalties Under the Income-tax Act, we discussed various penalties imposable under the Income-tax Act in respec...

June 8, 2022 61648 Views 2 comments Print


Latest News


AOTAA files PIL before Orissa HC on the issue of late fee, interest & penalty under Income Tax

Income Tax : All Odisha Tax Advocates Association has filed an PIl before Orissa High Court with following Prayers- (i) Admit the Writ Petition...

January 13, 2022 4416 Views 1 comment Print


Latest Judiciary


No Penalty under Section 271B if Penalty Already Levied under Section 271A

Income Tax : Mumbai ITAT sets aside penalty under section 271B, citing previous penalty under section 271A for non-maintenance of accounts in H...

March 20, 2024 303 Views 0 comment Print

Penalty u/s. 271B for not getting books of accounts audited not leviable as reasonable cause shown: ITAT Jaipur

Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur held that assessee failed to get its books of accounts audited based on a reasonable cause. Accordingly, penalty under...

March 20, 2024 525 Views 0 comment Print

Loss or low profit cannot be reason for exclusion of comparables for computing ALP: ITAT Mumbai

Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that exclusion of comparables for the reason that those companies are loss making or low profit making is not cor...

February 15, 2024 204 Views 0 comment Print

Kerala HC directs NFAC to expedite decision on stay application 

Income Tax : Kerala High Court instructs prompt consideration of stay application in tax dispute involving non-filing of income return under Se...

December 31, 2023 330 Views 0 comment Print

Section 40A(2)(b) Disallowance for Assumed Higher Sub-contracting Income is unsustainable

Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that disallowance under section 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act on merely estimating that more income should have ...

November 1, 2023 888 Views 0 comment Print


Sec. 271B No penalty on club having bonafide belief of mutuality

February 26, 2016 1759 Views 0 comment Print

It is clear that the assessee was under the bonafide belief that the provisions of Section 44AB were not applicable to a Club, while supplying beverages, liquor etc., to its members as it was not engaged in any business

Give CBDT Powers to Grant Immunity From Penalty U/S.271B

February 7, 2016 3624 Views 0 comment Print

Suggestion For Union Budget 2016-17 For Amendment In Section 119(2)(A) To Give CBDT Specific Powers For Granting General Immunity From Penalty U/S.271B (As An Effective Alternative Remedy For Extension Of Due Date For Obtaining And Furnishing Of Tax Audit Reports)

No Penalty on Tax Audit Report Obtained on last day of due date

December 3, 2015 4514 Views 0 comment Print

Chopra Properties Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) AO was of the view that according to provisions of Section 44AB assessee is required to get his accounts audited before specified date and not on the specified date. Therefore, as assessee has obtained this tax audit report on 30th September 2008 and not before 30th September, 2008, therefore, levied penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- u/s 271B of the IT Act.

Penalty U/s. 271B by ITO exceeding Rs. 10,000 in absence of prior approval of Joint Commissioner not valid

February 17, 2014 3438 Views 0 comment Print

Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the order imposing penalty does not disclose that prior approval of the Joint Commissioner was obtained in either of the two cases. He drew our attention to a judgment of this Court in the case of AWT No. 4 of 2003 and AWT No. 5 of 2003

No Penalty U/s. 271B for by mistake filing of unsigned report of auditor

February 5, 2014 6069 Views 0 comment Print

The only defect which could be pointed out by the department is that the auditor’s report was unsigned and unverified. The said defect indisputably has been removed by filing the certificate of auditor and also the signed report. In our view, it was a matter of slip of pen for filing unsigned auditor’s report.

Tax Audit Provision applies to Income From Partnership Firm

January 23, 2014 11574 Views 0 comment Print

The brief facts of the case are that the AO observed from the return of income filed by the assesee that the assessee’ s income included income from salary from Price Water House of which he was a partner. Since income by way of salary or remuneration from a firm was to be assessed

Tax Audit applicable to Partners on Income from Partnership Firm

January 23, 2014 29204 Views 0 comment Print

The short issue in this appeal is whether or not penalty under section 44AB will also be attracted in the case in which the professional income of the assessee received from partnership firm of Chartered Accountants is taxable under the head “income from business or profession

If No Books of Account then no question of audit & no penalty for not getting tax audit done

April 20, 2013 5304 Views 0 comment Print

In yet another case of Shri Ramchandra D Keluskar in ITA No.668/PN/10, the Pune Bench of this Tribunal found that when there are no books of account, the question of its audit does not arise. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that when the books of account was not maintained and the penalty levied u/s 271A was deleted, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that there is no justification for levying penalty u/s 271B of the Act for not getting the books of account audited.

Even if e-Return filed after due date but tax audit report obtained & not furnished no penalty u/s 271B

April 10, 2013 3672 Views 0 comment Print

We found that assessee’s case is squarely covered by the decision of Mumbai Bench in the case of B.D. Leasing and Finance Limited, (2013) 49(II) ITCL 148, wherein it was held that penalty u/s 271B for non-filing of tax audit report cannot be levied in view of the CBDT Circular No.9/2006 dated 10.10.2006, which provided that in case of electronic filing of return, tax audit report need not to be filed alongwith return.