CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION LIMITED,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT/THE INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), LAKHIMPUR KHEREI

ITA 819/LKW/2025Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 September 2026AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal permitted the appeal to be withdrawn and dismissed as such. The assessee's authorized representative, on the date of hearing, submitted an application on behalf of the Secretary of the assessee society stating that the management had decided not to pursue the appeal. Consequently, the appeal was not being pressed. The Revenue's representative had no objection to the withdrawal of the appeal. In consideration of these submissions, the appeal was permitted to be withdrawn and dismissed. The Tribunal did not decide on the merits of the grounds raised by the assessee. The operative direction was to dismiss the appeal as withdrawn.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Co-operative Cane Development Union Limited, is in appeal against the order of the CIT(A), NFAC dated 25.09.2025, which dismissed the assessee's appeal against a penalty order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for Assessment Year 2018-19. The AO had levied a penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/-. The AO had initiated penalty proceedings as the assessee, with receipts exceeding Rs. 3 Crores, was obliged to get its accounts audited under section 44AB but had not done so within the prescribed time. The assessee contended that the delay was due to the State Cane Department's delay in appointing auditors. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in the assessee's submission. The assessee then filed the present appeal before the ITAT.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the penalty notice and order under section 271B are invalid due to not specifying whether the penalty is for failure to get accounts audited or failure to furnish the report, rendering the penalty notice and consequential order illegal and liable to be quashed (as argued by the assessee)? 2. Whether the penalty is leviable for failure to get books audited when the audit report was e-filed on 25.09.2019 and was available to the AO during assessment proceedings, meaning it is not a case of failure to get books audited (as argued by the assessee)? 3. Whether there was a reasonable cause for the non-filing of the audit report within the due date prescribed under the Act, thereby warranting deletion of the penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- imposed under section 271B (as argued by the assessee)? 4. Whether the delay in conducting the audit is attributable to the delay in the appointment of auditors by the State Government society, and if so, whether this constitutes a reasonable cause for non-compliance (as argued by the assessee)? 5. Whether there was any failure on the part of the assessee to get accounts audited under section 44AB, given that the audit was obtained on 25.09.2019 and electronically uploaded on the same date, indicating no delay in conducting the audit (as argued by the assessee)? 6. Whether the penalty imposed is excessive, contrary to facts, law, and principles of natural justice, and whether sufficient opportunity was provided to the assessee (as argued by the assessee)? The Revenue did not record any arguments in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271B,Section 274,Section 44AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW ‘A’ BENCH, LUCKNOW

Hearing: 03.09.2026Pronounced: 29.09.2026

PER NIKHIL CHOUDHARY, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC dated 25.09.2025, wherein the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee against the penalty order passed by the ld. Assessing Officer under section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2018-19 on 30.06.2025. The grounds of appeal are as under: - “1-That the Ld. C.LT. (A) erred on facts and in law in not considering that the Show Cause Notice u/s 271B of I. T. Act dated 05-03-2021 as well as the assessment order, did not specify that whether the Penalty is for failure to get accounts audited or failu

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271B

All 1,993 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →