ACIT v. Gayatri Traders

58 ITR 121Income Tax Appellate Tribunal1996#10002 most cited

What is ACIT v. Gayatri Traders authority for?

Penalty under Section 271B is not mandatory and depends on the facts and circumstances, allowing the Assessing Officer discretion, especially when reasonable cause is shown for failure to comply with Section 44AB.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Gayatri Traders · Section 271B · Section 44AB · penalty for delay · audit report · reasonable cause · discretion of AO · ITAT Hyderabad Special Bench

Also reported as

58 ITD 121

Sections most often in play

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44AB

Judgments citing ACIT v. Gayatri Traders

Razaq Liyakhath Ali, Channagiri vs. ITO-Ward-2(1) Davanagere, Davanagere

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1339/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2017-18 Shri. Razaq Liyakhath Ali, Vs. Ito, Kouzer Masjid Circle Fort Road, Ward – 2(1), Channagiri, Davangere. Davangere – 577 213. Pan : Acepl 3149 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Sachin, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 01.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.09.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Sachin, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

…learned CIT(A) also fixed the case for hearing and assessee filed written submissions on 16.08.2024 which is reproduced in his Order. The learned CIT(A) relied on the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Gayatri Traders reported in [1996] 58 ITD 121 HYD. dated 30.04.1996 and he distinguished the judgments relied on by the learned Counsel and confirmed the penalty against which the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. Page 3 of 5 4. The learned Counsel reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and he has filed the written synopsis. In addition to the above, he submitte…

Air India Air Transport Services Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT 9(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2856/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm (Virtual Court Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 2856/Mum/2019 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Aditya Tamboli & MsFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain, Ld. DR by
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 273BSection 274Section 44A

…s year has to get its accounts of such previous year audited by an accountant before the specified date and furnished by that date. We would like to place reliance on the decision of Spl. Bench of ITAT, Hyderabad in the case of ACIT Vs. Gayatri Traders [1996] 58 ITD 121 (Hyd), wherein a Spl. Bench was constituted noticing the conflict in the interpretation placed in section 271B by various Benches of the Tribunal. The Hon‟ble President of ITAT has been pleased to constitute Spl. Bench for resolving the following issues and disposing of the appeal : “(Whether the provision of section 271B of the I.T. Act provides…

M/S. Slv Housing Development Corporation, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle- 2(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 18/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Arvind V Chavan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K., D.R
Section 271BSection 44A

…proves that there was reasonable cause for the failure to comply with the provisions of sec.44AB of the Act. The approach to be adopted on levy of penalty u/s 271B has been explained by Hyderabad Special Bench of ITAT in the case of ACIT vs. Gayatri Traders (58 ITD 121)(HYd)(SB):- “31. Levy of penalty under Section 271B is neither mandatory nor a must. The plain language of Section 271B provides that if any person fails to get his accounts audited or obtain a report as required under Section 44AB, "the Assessing Officer may direct that such person shall pay by way of penalty". The use of the words "may direct"…

Siby Mining and Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Range-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 34/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri C. SureshFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 154Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 271CSection 273B

…ly in a fair and reasonable manner, so as to advance the cause of justice, since harsh and legalistic approach should be mitigated by a soft approach in applying penal provisions, as held by the Hyderabad Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Gayatri Traders (58 ITR 121). He also referred to the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Sukhdev Sing vs. JCIT (TDS) (pages 37 to 40 of paper book-2) to contend that under identical circumstances – with regard to non-deduction of tax on the interest to NBFCs – the claim of bonafide belief was accepted by the ITAT. He also took support of the decision of the…

Siby Mining and Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. T. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Range-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 33/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri C. SureshFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 154Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 271CSection 273B

…ly in a fair and reasonable manner, so as to advance the cause of justice, since harsh and legalistic approach should be mitigated by a soft approach in applying penal provisions, as held by the Hyderabad Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Gayatri Traders (58 ITR 121). He also referred to the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Sukhdev Sing vs. JCIT (TDS) (pages 37 to 40 of paper book-2) to contend that under identical circumstances – with regard to non-deduction of tax on the interest to NBFCs – the claim of bonafide belief was accepted by the ITAT. He also took support of the decision of the…

Siby Mining and Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Range-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 32/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri C. SureshFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 154Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 271CSection 273B

…ly in a fair and reasonable manner, so as to advance the cause of justice, since harsh and legalistic approach should be mitigated by a soft approach in applying penal provisions, as held by the Hyderabad Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Gayatri Traders (58 ITR 121). He also referred to the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Sukhdev Sing vs. JCIT (TDS) (pages 37 to 40 of paper book-2) to contend that under identical circumstances – with regard to non-deduction of tax on the interest to NBFCs – the claim of bonafide belief was accepted by the ITAT. He also took support of the decision of the…

Siby Mining and Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Range-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 31/HYD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri C. SureshFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 154Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 271CSection 273B

…ly in a fair and reasonable manner, so as to advance the cause of justice, since harsh and legalistic approach should be mitigated by a soft approach in applying penal provisions, as held by the Hyderabad Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Gayatri Traders (58 ITR 121). He also referred to the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Sukhdev Sing vs. JCIT (TDS) (pages 37 to 40 of paper book-2) to contend that under identical circumstances – with regard to non-deduction of tax on the interest to NBFCs – the claim of bonafide belief was accepted by the ITAT. He also took support of the decision of the…

Siby Mining and Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Range-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 30/HYD/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri C. SureshFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 154Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 271CSection 273B

…ly in a fair and reasonable manner, so as to advance the cause of justice, since harsh and legalistic approach should be mitigated by a soft approach in applying penal provisions, as held by the Hyderabad Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Gayatri Traders (58 ITR 121). He also referred to the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Sukhdev Sing vs. JCIT (TDS) (pages 37 to 40 of paper book-2) to contend that under identical circumstances – with regard to non-deduction of tax on the interest to NBFCs – the claim of bonafide belief was accepted by the ITAT. He also took support of the decision of the…

Siby Mining and Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Range-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 29/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri C. SureshFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 154Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 271CSection 273B

…ly in a fair and reasonable manner, so as to advance the cause of justice, since harsh and legalistic approach should be mitigated by a soft approach in applying penal provisions, as held by the Hyderabad Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Gayatri Traders (58 ITR 121). He also referred to the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Sukhdev Sing vs. JCIT (TDS) (pages 37 to 40 of paper book-2) to contend that under identical circumstances – with regard to non-deduction of tax on the interest to NBFCs – the claim of bonafide belief was accepted by the ITAT. He also took support of the decision of the…

Siby Mining and Infrastructure Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS Range-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 28/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 May 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Manmohan & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri C. SureshFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 154Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 271CSection 273B

…ly in a fair and reasonable manner, so as to advance the cause of justice, since harsh and legalistic approach should be mitigated by a soft approach in applying penal provisions, as held by the Hyderabad Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Gayatri Traders (58 ITR 121). He also referred to the decision of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in the case of Sukhdev Sing vs. JCIT (TDS) (pages 37 to 40 of paper book-2) to contend that under identical circumstances – with regard to non-deduction of tax on the interest to NBFCs – the claim of bonafide belief was accepted by the ITAT. He also took support of the decision of the…

M/S. Bsi Group India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5949/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini

For Appellant: Sh. Shailesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. A. Sreenivasa Rao, Sr. DR
Section 271BSection 44A

…lty proceedings u/s 271B of I.T. Act, 1961 and did not bother to file its reply by 20.06.2013. 5.5. The case laws cited by the appellant do not come to its rescue. In this context, reliance is placed on the judgement - ACIT Vs. Gayathri Traders (ITAT, SB-Hyd) 58 ITD 121 wherein it has been stipulated that accounts got audited belatedly after the specified date u/s 44AB - Penalty leviable since sufficient cause/reason not furnished.” 5. Now the assessee is in appeal. The ld. Counsel for the assessee at the very outset stated that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee vide order of the ITAT Mumba…

ACIT v. Gayatri Traders (58 ITR 121) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax