PRANAB GOHAIN,DIBRUGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-1(2, DIBRUGARH

Heard the ld. D/R. The only issues raised in the instant appeal is against the levy of penalty u/s 271B of the Act. As per the provisions of Section 271B of the Act, if any person fails to get his accounts audited in respect of any previous year or years relevant to an assessment year, or fails to furnish a report of such audit as required u/s 44AB of the Act, the Assessing Officer may direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty a sum equal to ½ % of the total sales, turnover or gross receipts, as the case may be or a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- whichever is less. Assessment Year: 2016-17 Pranab Gohain 2

On perusal of the record, we notice that the assessee e-filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2016-17 on 07/04/2017 declaring total income at Rs.4,39,470/- and the audit report u/s 44AB of the Act was submitted electronically on 31/03/2017. It is not in dispute that the assessee was required to get its accounts audited u/s 44AB of the Act and the report should have been furnished on or before 17/10/2016. Since the assessee submitted the report on 31/03/2017, the provisions of Section 271B of the Act were invoked. The only reason given by the assessee for such delay before the ld. Assessing Officer was the lack of information about the prevalent norms including website of the Department. We, however, do not find any merit in such reasons.

Further the assessee also raised ground stating that the penalty order has been prepared prior to the date of assessment. We, however do not find merit in this ground also since during the course of penalty proceedings, notices/letters have been issued to the assessee on various dates falling during the financial year 2017-18. Though the date of order is mentioned as 28/03/2017, but apparently there seems to be a typographical error and the date of order is presumed to be 28/03/2018. Even in the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the penalty proceedings, order u/s 271B of the Act is filed on 30/04/2018 and no such ground has been raised by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, this ground of the assessee that penalty order is bad in law as the same has been prepared prior to the date of assessment, is dismissed. We, therefore, under the given facts and circumstances are of the considered view that since the assessee failed to file the audit report within the prescribed time limit provided u/s 44AB of the Act without mentioning any reasonable cause for the said failure as contemplated u/s 273B of the Assessment Year: 2016-17 Pranab Gohain 3 Act, the ld. Assessing Officer has rightly invoked the provisions of Section 271B of the Act and levied penalty of Rs. 1,17,886/- on the assessee. Therefore, no interference is called for in the findings of the ld. CIT(A) and all the grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed and the penalty is confirmed.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.

""यथ" / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु" अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, गुवाहाटी /DR,ITAT, Guwahati, 6. गाड" फाईल /Guard file.