Income Tax

Penalty set aside as Tax Audit Report not filed due to strained relationship with CA

ITAT set aside Penalty u/s 271B as Tax Audit Report was not filed due to strained relationship with CA

In a recent judgment, ITAT Nagpur has set aside Penalty u/s 271B as the assessee could not file Tax Audit Report due to strained relationship with Chartered Accountant.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 4001 (2024) (05) ITAT

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in confirming penalty u/s 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) imposed by the Assessing Officer (AO) for not filing of tax audit report.

In the assessment order, the AO noticed that the assessee had reported a total revenue from operation exceeding statutory limit for tax audit as per section 44AB of the Act and tax audit report had not been filed.

After following the due procedure, assessment was completed and penalty proceedings u/s 271B of the Act was imposed.

On first appeal against the penalty order passed by the A.O. u/s 271B of the Act, the CIT(A) confirmed the order of the A.O.

Before the Tribunal the assessee submitted that there was strained relationship between the assessee’s Chartered Accountant and the assessee and, therefore, he was not able to file relevant details before the CIT(A) and, hence, one more opportunity should be given to substantiate his case before the CIT(A).

The assessee also filed certain additional evidences before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal observed that the A.O. in the instant case, imposed penalty u/s 271B of the Act on the ground that audit report was not obtained as per the provisions of section 44AB of the Act. The case of the assessee was that the assessee and the assessee’s Chartered Accountant has a strained relationship and, therefore, he was not able to file the audit report and he was not able to explain his case before the CIT(A) properly.

The assessee had filed some details in shape of additional evidence and in view of the above, the Tribunal opined that one more opportunity should be given to the assessee to substantiate his case before the CIT(A).

Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the order passed by the CIT(A) and restored the matter back to the file of CIT(A) with direction to consider the evidence to be filed by the asseseee after giving reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Bank

State Bank of India elects four Directors in its Central Board

State Bank of India in its General Meeting of the Shareholders elected four Directors to the Central Board. The meeting…

6 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Declaration of additional income by increasing the WIP was not proper – ITAT

Voluntary declaration of additional income by increasing WIP was not proper, as assessee will take the additional benefit in the…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Cash payment for purchase of land or property not violation of 269SS or 269T

Cash payment for purchase of land or property cannot be treated as violation of provisions of section 269SS or 269T…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Excel Utility for ITR-1 and ITR-4 available for e-filing for AY 2026-27

Income Tax Department has released excel Utility for e-filing ITR-1 and ITR-4 for AY 2026-27 Excel utilities of ITR-1 and…

3 days ago
  • Insurance

Mediclaim amount not deductible from MACT award under medical expenses – SC

Amount of money received as Mediclaim not deductible from an award passed by MACT under the head of medical expenses.…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT jurisdiction is decided by location of AO passing the impugned order

Location of the assessing officer who passed the order shall decide the jurisdiction of the Bench of the Tribunal In…

4 days ago