SUNIL KESHAVRAO SONAWANE,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, NASHIK

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- 2, Nashik (‘CIT(A)’ for short) dated 12.07.2017 confirming the levy of penalty of Rs.31,920/- for the assessment year 2010-11.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual engaged in profession of doctor in D.N.B. Cardiology. A survey operations u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ for short) were conducted in the business premises of the appellant on 11.03.2011. During the course of survey operations, the Assessing Officer found that the actual professional receipts were reflected in the returns of income filed for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2010-11. Accordingly, a notice u/s 148 of the Act was issued on 26.09.2011. In response to the notice u/s 148, the appellant filed the returns of income on 17.02.2012 showing the gross receipts exceeding turnover prescribed for filing the tax audit report u/s 44AB of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 271B of the Act and imposed the penalty of Rs.31,920/- for the assessment year 2010-11 vide penalty order dated 25.09.2013 rejecting the contention of the appellant that since the assessments were made consequent to the returns of income filed in response to notice u/s 148 of the Act since tax audit report was filed allowing with the same, no penalty should be imposed. 3. Being aggrieved by the above action of the Assessing Officer, an appeal was preferred before the ld. CIT(A), who vide his impugned order confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the appellant is before us in the present appeal. 5. We heard the ld. CIT-DR and perused the material on record. Admittedly, in the original returns of income filed, the appellant had not disclosed the actual gross receipts and the actual gross receipts were reflected in the revised returns of income filed by the appellant and the tax audited report was filed along with the revised returns of income. The occasion to get the books of account audited would arise only once the actual turnover was reflected in the books of account regularly maintained. The provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 prescribes a different penalty for the act of