SUKHWINDER SINGH,KURUKSHETRA vs. ACIT, KURUKSHETRA

आदेश/Order

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member: The captioned appeals have been preferred by the assessee against the separate orders dated 2.2.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Karnal [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’]. The

common grounds raised by the assessee in both the appeals reads as under:-

ITA Nos. 687 & 688-chd-2019 Shri Sukhwinder Singh, Kurukshetra 2 i) That the CIT (A) has erred in confirming the penalty levied by A.O by presuming or assuming or dreaming the lapse which infact was not.

ii) That the CIT (A) has erred in confirming his action of imposing the penalty irrespective of his admission in assessment order, he assessed the case on the basis of audit-report on records.

iii) That the CIT (A) further erred in confirming the penalty despite the fact, neither the audit-report was prepared after the due date nor non-submission during assessment proceedings.

iv) That the appellant craves the right to add, delete or alter any of the Grounds before or at the time of hearing of appeal.

identical, hence, they were heard together and are being disposed of by

this common order.

271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') of Rs. 1 lac for

each of the assessment year.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee along with return

of income also filed a statutory audit report. However, during the

assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that the audit

report attached was unsigned. When confronted, the assessee in this

respect has filed a duly signed audit report; however, the Assessing

Officer noticed that there was a mismatch of certain figures in the

ITA Nos. 687 & 688-chd-2019 Shri Sukhwinder Singh, Kurukshetra 3 second report as compared to the first unsigned audit report. The

Assessing Officer, therefore, observed that there was no justification for

the assessee to file an unsigned audit report, the figures of which did not

match with the audit report filed during the assessment proceedings. The

Assessing Officer, therefore, concluded that the audited balance sheet

was not available with the assessee on 30.9.2009 and at the time of the

filing of the original return of income.

report was duly filed along with return of income, however, since there

were certain typing mistakes in the audit report, the same were rectified

by the Chartered Accountant and accordingly the net profit was revised

to Rs. 34,63,410/- as compared to the earlier net profit of Rs.

24,18,840/-. It was also pleaded that since the accounts were audited

within the prescribed time, there was no violation which warrants the

imposition of penalty u/s 271B of the Act. However, the Ld. CIT(A) did

not get satisfied by the above contention raised by the assessee. He,

therefore, confirmed the penalty so levied by the Assessing Officer.

has come in appeal before us.

assessee had not filed any audit report alongwith return of income.

However, since certain discrepancies were found by the Assessing

ITA Nos. 687 & 688-chd-2019 Shri Sukhwinder Singh, Kurukshetra 4 Officer in the audit report field with the return of income, hence, the

assessee filed revised audit report from the Chartered Accountant. The

facts in this case reveal that it is not a case of default on the part of the

assessee, rather, there seems certain lapses on the part of the concerned

auditor of the assessee. However, the discrepancies in the audit report

occurred due to typographical error were rectified by filing of the

second report and accordingly the income of the assessee has been

assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act. In our view, the default on the part of

the assessee in this case falls within exception of reasonable cause as

provided u/s 273B of the Act.

In view of this, we do not find any justification on the part of the

lower authorities in imposing the impugned penalty, the same is

accordingly ordered to be deleted.

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed.

Order dictated and pronounced in the Open Court immediately on

completion of hearing.

Sd/- Sd/- (अ�नपूणा� गु�ता / ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (संजय गग� / SANJAY GARG) लेखा सद�य/ Accountant Member �या�यक सद�य/ Judicial Member Dated : 26.11.2019 “आर.के.”

ITA Nos. 687 & 688-chd-2019 Shri Sukhwinder Singh, Kurukshetra 5 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�त/ CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त (अपील)/ The CIT(A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य आ�धकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File

आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar