DR.D B D SATHIAKUMAR,CHENNAI vs. ACIT NON CORPORATE CIRCLE 6, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2065/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 March 2022AY 2011-124 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee paid the penalty amount and requested the appeal to be dropped. The Tribunal, with no objection from the Department, dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee, running a hospital and canteen, filed their return of income late despite having an audit report. The Assessing Officer levied a penalty under Section 271B for violating Section 44AB read with Section 139(1). The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether the appeal is maintainable after the penalty amount has been paid by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 44AB,Section 139(1),Section 271B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGHAND Dr. M.L. MEENA

For Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.CIT
Hearing: 10.03.2022Pronounced: 14.03.2022

आदेश /O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

PER BENCH:

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Chennai in dated 02.06.2017 for the assessment year 2011-2012.

2.

None appeared before us representing the Assessee while Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Additional CIT represented on behalf of the Department.

2 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessee is an individual who is in the business of running a hospital and a canteen for the patients. The Assessee filed his return of income electronically on 27.03.2012 admitting a total income of Rs.1,97,98,565/-. The same was processed u/s.143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 14.02.2013 determining a total income of Rs.1,97,98,565/-. Subsequent to the processing of the return of income u/s.143(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer had noticed that the total turnover of the Assessee was actually Rs.5,97,51,065/- and that the date of the audit report u/s.44AB of the Act was 30.09.2011 but the Assessee had filed its return of income only on 27.03.2012. As the Assessee has violated the provisions of Section 44AB r.w.s.139(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer levied penalty u/s.271B of the Act of Rs.1,50,000/-. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) had confirmed the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s.271B of the Act.

4.

Aggrieved, Assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. On appeal before us, the learned Counsel for the Assessee filed a letter dated 03.08.2021 along with a counterfoil towards remittance of the said amount of Rs.1,50,000/- as proof of payment for the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer u/s.271B of the Act and prayed to drop the appeal proceedings, as the amount of Rs.1,50,000/- was already remitted.

5.

The learned Departmental Representative, Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, Additional CIT had no objection towards the request of the Assessee.

6.

It is noted that the Assessee had paid the penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- levied by the Assessing Officer u/s.271B of the Act, vide Challan No.01578 dated 25.12.2019 and filed the Tax Payer Counterfoil vide letter dated 03.08.2021. The Assessee had requested to drop the appeal proceedings in his case, as the penalty amount was already remitted. The learned Departmental Representative has no serious objection to the request of the Assessee, and hence we hereby dismiss the appeal, as not maintainable.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 14th March, 2022 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 44AB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →