https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445341 ITAT Jaipur allowed the assessee's appeal, quashing the defect notice issued under section 139(9) treating the return as invalid. The AO incorrectly determined that audit under section 44AB was required as gross receipts exceeded Rs. 1 crore. However, ITAT held that sales proceeds from fixed assets don't constitute gross receipts for section 44AB purposes, referencing ICAI guidance and Y.K. Patel Securities precedent. Since actual business receipts were below Rs. 1 crore, no audit was required. The tribunal directed AO/CPC to treat the return as valid and process accordingly. en-us Mon, 30 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Nov 2023 10:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445341 ITAT Jaipur allowed the assessee's appeal, quashing the defect notice issued under section 139(9) treating the return as invalid. The AO incorrectly determined that audit under section 44AB was required as gross receipts exceeded Rs. 1 crore. However, ITAT held that sales proceeds from fixed assets don't constitute gross receipts for section 44AB purposes, referencing ICAI guidance and Y.K. Patel Securities precedent. Since actual business receipts were below Rs. 1 crore, no audit was required. The tribunal directed AO/CPC to treat the return as valid and process accordingly. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445341