TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 214
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The only grievance of the assessee in these appeals is with regard to confirming the penalty levied u/s.271BA of the Act by the CIT(A) for failure of furnish a report from Accountant as required by Sec.92E of the Act at `1 lakh for each assessment years. 3. The facts of the case in all these appeals are similar that the assessee filed return of income relevant in the assessment years 2007-08 to 2010-11. Show cause notices were issued on 04.07.2012 as to why penalty u/s.271BA should not be levied in the case of the assessee for belated filing of Form No.3CEB for all these assessment years. In response, the assessee submitted to the AO that the Form No.3CEB w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r assessment year 2005-06 vide order dated 18.09.2012 wherein held that penalty levied u/s.271G and U/s.271Aa of the Act following the earlier decision of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA Nos.1180 & 1181/Mds/2011 dated 09.03.2012 observing as follows:- "6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the TPO in the present case passed u/s 92 of the Act dated 20.09.2009 clearly shows that no adjustments have been made. A perusal of the show cause notices levied u/s 271AA and 271G shows that there is no specific indication as to the documents which were not furnished. In fact, the order of the TPO shows that the details were called for and the assessee had submitted the details. Further perusal of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 92E and 271BA which read as under: "92E. Every person who has entered into an international transaction during a previous year shall obtain a report from an accountant and furnish such report on or before the specified date in the prescribed form duly signed and verified in the prescribed manner by such accountant and setting forth such particulars as may be prescribed." "271BA If any person fails to furnish a report from an accountant as required by section 92E, the Assessing Officer may direct that such person shall pay, by way of penalty, a sum of one hundred thousand rupees." 7. From the above it is clear that as per the mandate of section 92E, the assessee in this case was to obtain the Audit Report and file....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ilure of the assessee to comply with the provision of the Act. 9. In this regard we place reliance from the Apex Court decision rendered by a larger Bench comprising of three of their Lordships in the case of Hindustan Steel vs. State of Orissa in 83 ITR 26 wherein it was held that: "An order imposing penalty for failure to carry out a statutory obligation is the result of a quasi-criminal proceedings, and penalty will not ordinarily be imposed unless the party obliged either acted deliberately in defiance of law or was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest, or acted in conscious disregard of its obligation. Penalty will not also be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. Whether penalty should be imposed or fa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ne hundred thousand rupees." As per Cec.92E reads as follows:- "92E. Every person who has entered into an international transaction during a previous year shall obtain a report from an accountant and furnish such report on or before the specified date in the prescribed form duly signed and verified in the prescribed manner by such accountant and setting forth such particulars as may be prescribed." 6.2 Admittedly in this case the assessee did not comply with the requirements of the above provisions of section 92E. The main contention of the assessee's counsel herein is that the assessee is having reasonable causes for not filing the audit report as prescribed by section 92E of the Act on the reason that it has a bona fide....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed as reasonable cause in terms of Section 273 B of the Act not in filing the Audit Report in time. The same view is taken by Co-ordinate Bench of Hyderabad Tribunal in the case of M/s.GI Systems Org. (India) (P) Ltd. V. ITO reported in 68 DTR 149 (A.T) (Hyd.) wherein observed that the assessee has not filed the report under section 92E before the AO on or before the completion of assessment under s. 143(3) or processing the return under s. 143(1) of the Act and simply attributed default on some clerical error without clarifying nature of said error; no reasonable cause is made out for the default in filing the audit report, and Therefore,, penalty u/s.271BA was sustainable. 6.4 Before us, the assessee placed reliance on the order of Del....