SHREE KRISHNA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, VISAKHAPATNAM

PDF · subscribers
ITA 91/VIZ/2023Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 June 2023AY 2018-19Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)6 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Section 44AB is applicable to 'Profits and Gains of Business or Profession' and not to 'income from other sources'. Since the income was consistently treated as 'income from other sources' by the assessee, CPC, and AO, the penalty under Section 271B was not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an educational society, claimed exemption under Section 10(23C) and filed a NIL income return. The AO initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271B for not obtaining a tax audit report as per Section 44AB, as gross receipts exceeded the limit. The assessee argued that since income was treated as 'income from other sources', Section 44AB was not applicable.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271B is leviable for non-compliance with Section 44AB when the income is treated as 'income from other sources' and not 'profits and gains of business or profession'.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271B,Section 44AB,Section 10(23C)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM

Before: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE

Hearing: 22/05/2023

PER S. BALAKRISHNAN, Accountant Member :

1.

This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC] vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022-23/1049738450(1), dated 14/02/2023

2 arising out of the order passed U/s. 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [the Act] for the AY 2018-19. registered under Societies Registration Act to run an educational institution. The assessee filed its return of income for the AY 2018-19 in ITR-7 on 30/10/2018 declaring NIL income after claiming exemption U/s. 10(23C) of the Act. The scrutiny assessment was completed on 7/4/2021 vide order U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 143(3A) & 143(3B) of the Act assessing the total income at Rs. 7,56,350/-. The Ld. AO during the scrutiny proceedings noticed that the assessee had gross receipts of Rs. 2,84,51,500/- which is exceeding the statutory limit for tax audit as per section 44AB of the Act and noticed that the assessee has not filed any report prescribed U/s. 44AB of the Act. Therefore, the Ld. AO initiated penalty proceedings U/s. 271B of the Act and show cause notice dated 7/4/2021 was issued and served on the assessee. Thereafter, one more show cause notice dated 15/07/2021 was also issued and served on the assessee. In response, the assessee submitted that the Ld. AO has assessed the income under ‘income from other sources’ during the scrutiny assessment proceedings and hence it is not required to be audited U/s. 44AB of the Act. After carefully considering the submissions of the assessee, the Ld. AO being not convinced, rejected the assessee’s reply and proceeded to levy penalty of Rs. 1,42,260/- U/s. 271B of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, the assessee filed an appeal before the NFAC.

3.

On appeal, the NFAC confirmed the order of the Ld. AO.

Aggrieved by the order of the NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before us and raised the following grounds of appeal:

“1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is contrary to the facts and also the law applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in deciding the appeal exparte. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in sustaining the penalty of Rs. 1,42,260/- levied by the Assessing Officer U/s. 271B of the Act. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing.” 4.

4.

The only issue arises from the above grounds is sustenance of penalty of Rs. 1,42,260/- levied by the Ld. AO U/s. 271B of the Act.

5.

At the outset, the Ld. AR argued that the assessee filed its return of income declaring it as income from other sources. The CPC while processing the return U/s. 143(1) of the Act has also considered the income of the assessee as income from other

4 sources. The Ld. AO during the scrutiny assessment proceedings in his computation sheet has treated the income as income from other sources. The Ld. AR therefore pleaded that since the income of the assessee has been consistently treated as income from other sources, the provisions of section 44AB of the Act which are applicable to the Profit & Gains of Business or Profession cannot be applied in the instant case. He therefore pleaded to delete the penalty levied by the Ld. AO.

Per contra, the Ld. DR fully supported the orders of the Ld.

Revenue Authorities.

6.

We have heard both the sides and perused the material available on record and the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities. Admittedly, while filing the return of income, the assessee has disclosed its income as income from other sources as demonstrated in page 6 of the paper book in Sl. No.13(iv) of the ITR-7. Subsequently, we also find that the intimation U/s. 143(1) also considered it as income from other sources. During the scrutiny assessment proceedings, the Ld. AO also in his computation sheet which is available in page 42 of the paper book treated the income of the assessee as income from other sources. Section 44AB(a) of the Act clearly states that Every

5 person,—(a) carrying on business shall, if his total sales, turnover or gross receipts, as the case may be, in business exceed or exceeds the prescribed limits”. In the instant case, since the income has been treated as income from other sources and not as income from profit & gains of business or profession, the provisions of section 44AB of the Act, in our considered view, are not applicable. We therefore have no hesitation to delete the penalty of Rs. 1,42,260/- levied by the Ld. AO and direct the Ld. AO accordingly.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. 7.

Pronounced in the open Court on the 15th June, 2023.

More judgments on Section 271B

All 1,993 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →