2020 (4) TMI 652

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2016. 2. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these appeals, we proceed to dispose of the same vide this common order. 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to the appeal in ITA No.2215/Chny/2019 for assessment year 2014-15 are stated herein. 4. The Assessee raised the following grounds of appeal: ''1. The Order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirming the levy of penalty u/s 271 B of the Act is arbitrary and contrary to the law, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have appreciated that there is a reasonable and justifiable cause for non submission of Audit Report u/s. 44AB of the Income Tax Act. 3....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... had disclosed turnover of Rs. 9,97,79,324/- and tax audit report as prescribed u/s.44AB of the Act was not filed within the due date issued show cause notice dated 29.12.2017. In response, it was submitted that tax audit report was uploaded alongwith return of income on 29.06.2017 and therefore penalty should not be levied. The Assessing Officer was of the view that assessee had failed to demonstrate reasonable cause and therefore proceeded with levy penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- vide order dated 28.06.2018. 6. Being aggrieved, an appeal was preferred before the Ld.CIT(A) who vide impugned order confirmed levy of penalty. 7. Being aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the appellant is in appeal before us in the present appeal. The ld....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., this Court is of the view that the explanation offered by the assessee can be taken as a reasonable cause for his failure to file the audit report within time. We are also aware that the assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Act only on 29.3.2015 and on that date, the audit report was very much available with the Assessing Officer. 11. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in the case of Hindustan Steel Limited Vs. State of Orissa [reported in (1972) 83 ITR 26], considered the validity of levy of penalty under the provisions of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947. One of the questions, which was framed for consideration was as to whether imposition of penalty for failure to register as a dealer was justified. The Hon'ble Apex Court p....