RAKESH KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that if an assessee fails to maintain books of accounts, the default under Section 44AA is complete. Therefore, a subsequent default for not getting the non-existent books audited under Section 44AB cannot attract a penalty under Section 271B.
What were the facts?
The assessee failed to maintain books of accounts and get them audited as required under Sections 44AA and 44AB of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, a penalty was levied under Section 271B for non-compliance with Section 44AB.
What were the issues?
Whether penalty under Section 271B is leviable for non-maintenance of books of accounts, or if it applies only to non-compliance with the audit requirement when books are maintained.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(9)Show listHide 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.
- CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory2,590 citing218 Taxmann 423 · 2013 · HC · Read judgment
- CIT v. Aero Traders Pvt. Ltd.202 citing322 ITR 316 · 2010 · HC
- Surajmal Parsuram Todi v. CIT114 citing222 ITR 691 · 1996 · HC
- CIT v. S.K. Gupta & Co.110 citing322 ITR 86 · 2010 · HC
- CIT v. Bisauli Tractors81 citing299 ITR 219 · 2008 · HC
- CIT v. Dhillon Rice Mills30 citing256 ITR 447 · 2002 · HC
- Santhosa Nadar v. First Addl. ITO9 citing46 ITR 411 · 1962 · HC
- Narayanappa & Bros. v. CIT8 citing41 ITR 125 · 1961
- CWT v. Yadu Raj Narain Singh7 citing286 ITR 564 · 2006
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR
Before: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 330/JP/2022
PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal is filed by assessee and is arising out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 29/06/2022 [here in after (NFAC)/ ld. CIT(A) ] for assessment year 2012-13 which in turn arise from the order of the penalty passed u/s. 271B of the Act dated 06.01.2022 by the National Faceless Center, Delhi [ here in after th
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.
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 44AA
- Olive Enterprises, Bangalore vs Income Tax Officer Ward 5(2)(1), BangaloreITA 2547/BANG/2026[2024-2025]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2024-2025
- Sreeveena Vaddireddy, Ananthapur vs ADIT, (Int Taxn)-2, HyderabadITA 1946/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed23 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Ram Lal Narwani, Jaipur vs ITO Ward. 6(1), JaipurITA 32/JPR/2026[2011-12]Status: Disposed22 Sept 2026AY 2011-12
- M/S Ashok Petrol Co., Indore vs The ITO - 2(1), IndoreITA 121/IND/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed25 Aug 2026AY 2020-21
- M/S Ashok Petrol Co., Indore vs The ITO - 2(1), IndoreITA 120/IND/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed25 Aug 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetanj Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026