TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (3) TMI 101
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- each imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. The only ground that is to be decided is as to whether the ld. CIT-A correct in confirming the penalty imposed by the AO U/S 271B of the Act in the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. Since the Assessee and the issue raised therein are common and identical, both the appeals clubbed and heard together and disposed of the same by this common order for the sake of convenience. Therefore, the common facts as arrayed in ITA 804/Kol/2014 are discussed herein under for the same. 4. The Assessee is a Co-operative Society. The Tax Audit report as required by the provisions of section 44AB of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was submitted that the Assessee-society thereafter appointed Tax Auditor, who in turn submitted his audit report on 31-07-2009, which was filed on 14-09-2009 along with the return of income for the year under consideration. It was contended that there was sufficient cause for the delay in filing the Tax Audit Report before the specified date on 30-09-2008 and failure to furnish the same within the due date is not intentional and was beyond its control. The CIT(A), however, did not find merit in the same and proceeded to confirm the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer for the following reasons given in paragraph 3.4 of his impugned order:- "3.4. In the present case the appellant has not been able to prove that there was a reasonabl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the case of supra is reproduced herein below for useful reading: 4. We have heard both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As submitted on behalf of the assessee before the authorities below as well as before us, its failure to obtain and furnish the tax audit report by the specified date of 30.09.2009 as per the requirement of section 44AB was due to delay in completion of statutory audit by the auditors appointed by the Cooperative Department. Since the statutory auditor under the Cooperative Act was to be appointed by the Cooperative Department and such appointment as well as conduct and completion of audit by the statutory auditor was beyond the control of the assessee, we find merit in the content....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... same from its Tax Auditor in Form No.3CA on 14-09-2009. We find that the issue on hand is similar to that case decided by order dated 03-06-2016 by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal passed in ITA No.2396/Kol/2013 in the case of supra. Following the same, we are of the view that it is not a fit case to impose the penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- u/s. 271B of the Act. Therefore, we cancel the penalty imposed by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A). Therefore, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed. 10. Now, coming to other appeal filed for AY 2009-10 in ITA 805/Kol/ 2014, as discussed above, the facts are admittedly undisputed except the dates in respect of obtaining Statutory audit report etc... In this year the Statutory auditors appoi....