NAGA THULASIRAM JAYANTHI,SALEM vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1) SALEM, SALEM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 313/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 April 2023AY 2016-173 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the Tax Audit Report was obtained before the due date of the return and the delay in furnishing was due to genuine medical reasons, it was not a fit case for imposing a penalty.

What were the facts?

The assessee failed to furnish the Tax Audit Report in terms of Section 44AB along with the return of income for AY 2016-17. The report was eventually furnished, but after the due date, due to the assessee's adverse medical condition.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271B is leviable for delayed furnishing of the Tax Audit Report when the delay is attributable to genuine medical reasons and the report was obtained before the return filing due date.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44AB,Section 271B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM, & HON’BLE SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS

आयकर अपील सं./ (िनधा@रण वष@ / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Mrs. Naga Thulasiram Jayanthi ACIT बनाम 18/5, Propx: Jayanthi Silvers, Circle-1(1) / Vs. Rajaji Road, Salem-636 007. Salem. �थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./PAN/GIR No. ACAPJ-0476-F (अपीलाथ%/Appellant) : (&'थ% / Respondent) अपीलाथ% की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri Ashok Durai (C.A)-Ld. AR &'थ% की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri D.Hema Bhupal (JCIT) –Ld.DR सुनवाई की तारीख/Date of Hearing : 25-04-2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 25-04-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aggrieved by confirmation of penalty u/s 271B for Rs.1.50 Lacs for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17, the assessee is in further appeal before us. The impugned order has been passed by learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] on 07-02-2023 in the matter of impugned penalty levied by Ld. AO vide order dated 29.06.2019. Having heard rival submissions and after perusal of case records, the appeal is disposed-off as under.

2 - 2. The assessee was assessed u/s 143(3) on 28.12.2018 wherein returned income was accepted. However, the assessee failed to furnish Tax Audit Report in terms of Sec.44AB along with return of income, Ld. AO proposed impugned penalty. The Audit Report was furnished on 26.12.2016. The assessee is stated to be sole proprietor of M/s Jayanthi Silvers. In defense, it was submitted that the audit was completed on 19.09.2016 and the return of income was filed on 26.12.2016. The same was due to the adverse medical conditions being faced by the assessee. In support, certificate from doctor was also furnished. However, Ld AO held that the assessee was required to furnish the report electronically on or before 30.09.2016 and therefore, impugned penalty was levied. The Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the same on the ground that there was no reasonable cause. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

3.

Upon perusal of factual matrix as stated above, it could be seen that the assessee has obtained the Tax Audit Report well before due date of return of income. However, the delay in furnishing the same happened due to adverse medical conditions being faced by the assessee. There is only minor delay and ultimately the returned income has been accepted by the assessee. Therefore, it is not a fit case for imposition of penalty. We order so.

4.

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order.

Order pronounced on 25th April, 2023.

More judgments on Section 44AB

All 2,486 judgments and leading authorities on Section 44AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →