Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2023 (11) TMI 590

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....] vide it's order dated 13.6.2022, posted for hearing alongwith it's stay application. 2. The assessee, a primary agricultural credit society (PACS) registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (Kerala Act),filed it's audit report u/s. 44AB of the Act for the relevant year along with its return of income on 21.06.2014 as against the due date specified therein, i.e.,31.10.2013. On being show caused in the matter, inasmuch as the same attracts penalty under section 271B of the Act, the assessee reiterated the fact of having uploaded the audit report on 21.6.2014 along with the return of income. The assessee thus furnishing no reasonable cause for the delayed submission of the audit report, as provided u/s. 273B of the Act f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....see is required to get it's accounts audited under any other law for the time being in force, the same is also to be furnished along with. Non-compliance of the provision attracts penalty u/s. 271B of the Act at ½% of the turnover or Rs. 1.50 lakhs, whichever is less. Proving a reasonable cause, however, saves penalty u/s. 273B. 4.2 In Peroorkkada Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. ITO [2020] 424 ITR 422 (Ker), the imposition of penalty under section 271B r/ws. 44AB of the Act was defended by the assessee stating that the audit was carried under the Co-operative Societies Act, which would suffice. Upholding the imposition of penalty, the Hon'ble Court held that the mere fact that the audit was conducted under the Co-operative ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....risdictional High Court thus clarifies as: (a) The furnishing of audit report/s under section 44AB of the Act is mandatory; (b) Only furnishing both audit reports, where so required in terms of the provision, would be in due compliance thereof; (c) The penalty shall, however, be subject to the assessee, upon being provided opportunity for the same, unable to prove reasonable cause. 4.3 The purview of an appellate court, therefore, on a matter coming up before it, is to see if the explanation furnished, together with the materials led in support, would establish reasonable cause or not. In the facts of the instant case, the assessee's only case is that it was not aware of the requirement of law. Could that be, o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... income for the relevant year, or otherwise does not his file return of income, he is yet obliged to furnish the audit report in time. Delinked thus from the obligation of filing the return, it is so from the ensuing assessment proceedings, if any, as well. Why, as posed by the Bench during hearing, to no answer by Shri Sivadas, the learned counsel for the assessee, there may be no assessment proceedings in a given case. For all we know, the information furnished through the audit report may be collated to furnish information that could guide policy framework for selecting and/or indeed the selection of returns for being subject to verification procedure under the Act, i.e., form the basis for initiating assessment proceedings. The argument....