PARAS CHAND JAIN,KEKRI vs. ITO, AJMER

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR Jh Hkkxpan] ys[kk lnL;] ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 782/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2013-14 cuke Paras Chand Jain, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Kla Ji Ka Chowk, Sawar, Ward-2(3), Kekri. Ajmer. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ADPPJ 8047 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 26/10/2017 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 12/12/2017 vkns'k@ ORDER

PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of the ld. CIT(A), Ajmer dated 13/06/2016 for the A.Y. 2013-14. The only issue involved in the appeal is sustaining the penalty U/s 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) r.w.r. 274 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short the Rules). 2. None attended on behalf of the assessee and the written submissions has been considered while deciding the appeal.

ITA 782/JP/2016_ 2 Paras Chand Jain Vs ITO

reasonable cause for the assessee for not to file tax audit report online.

The assessee put the blame on Auditor that he has failed to do so, but

it cannot be considered a reasonable cause to explain the non-

compliance. She prayed to sustain the order of the ld. CIT(A).

submissions of the ld DR, the Bench is of the view that the assessee

has failed to demonstrate that there was a reasonable cause for the

failure to file the audit report online in time. Simply stating that the

Auditor failed to do so cannot exempt the assessee from levy of

penalty. The ld. CIT(A) has sustained the penalty by holding as under:

“4.3 I have gone through the penalty order, statement of facts, ground of appeal and the written submission carefully. It is seen that the appellant has not been able to show that it had filed the audit report obtained U/s 44AB for the A.Y. 2013-14. The contention of the appellant that the audit report could not be uploaded due to some technical problem is also not supported with any documentary evidence. Therefore, this contention of appellant is also not found acceptable. No other reasonable cause for non submission of the audit report has been given by the appellant. In view of these facts, I am of the considered view that the A.O. has rightly levied the penalty of U/s 271B for non filing of audit report as required

ITA 782/JP/2016_ 3 Paras Chand Jain Vs ITO U/s 44AB. Accordingly, the penalty levied by the A.O. is confirmed.”

Considering all these factual aspects, the Bench sustain the levy of

penalty and uphold the order of the ld. CIT(A).

Order pronounced in the open court on 12/12/2017.

Sd/- ¼Hkkxpan½ (BHAGCHAND) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 12th December, 2017 *Ranjan आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- Shri Paras Chand Jain, Kekri (Ajmer). 1. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward-2(3), Ajmer. 2. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 4. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत 5. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 782/JP/2016) 6. vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,

सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत