SHRI RADHEYSHYAM BISANI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2)(1), SURAT

ITA 288/SRT/2023Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 May 2023AY 2016-17Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)18 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that income from capital gains and short-term capital gains from share transactions does not constitute business turnover for the purpose of Section 44AB. Therefore, the assessee was not required to get their books audited, and no penalty under Section 271B was leviable.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271B for failure to obtain a tax audit, considering the assessee's share trading turnover to be business activity exceeding the threshold under Section 44AB. The CIT(A) confirmed the penalty.

What were the issues?

Whether share trading income constitutes business turnover for the purpose of Section 44AB, and if failure to obtain an audit under such circumstances attracts penalty under Section 271B.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271B,Section 44AB,Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH (SMC), SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER (Physical hearing) Radheyshyam Bisani, I.T.O., B. 1102, Shyam Sangini Apartment, Ward-1(2)(1), Vs. GD Goenka Canal Road, Vesu, Surat. Surat. Old Address: 204, Paras Market, Ring Road, Surat. PAN No. AASPB 9157 F Appellant/ assessee Respondent/ revenue

Assessee represented by Shri Suresh K. Kabra, CA Department represented by Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Institution of Appeal 26/04/2023 Date of hearing 25/05/2023 Date of pronouncement 25/05/2023 Order under Section 254(1) of Income Tax Act PER: PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (in short, the ld. CIT(A)) dated 14/03/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred and was not just and proper on the facts of the case and in law in confirming the penalty u/s 271B of the Act.

2.

Prayer

2.

1 The imposition of penalty may kindly be deleted.

2.

2 Personal hearing may be granted.

2.

3 Any other relief that your h

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 →