ITAT Jaipur Judgments — March 2023

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.

The Tribunal held that the evidence provided by the assessee, including payment by account payee cheques, was sufficient to prove the genuineness of the purchases. The inability to locate the creditors' current addresses should not lead to disallowance when other evidence exists.

The Tribunal held that for speculative commodity transactions, turnover should be computed based on the net profit/loss difference, not gross purchase/sale value. As the net difference did not exceed the threshold for mandatory audit, the penalty under Section 271B was not leviable.

The Tribunal held that the assessee had not concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars, as the subsidies were offered for taxation in the subsequent assessment year when conditions were met. Furthermore, the assessee had incurred losses in both assessment years, resulting in no tax liability.