2025 (1) TMI 566

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has raised following grounds of appeal: 1. That on facts and in law, the order passed by the learned Assessing Officer (AO) and the learned Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals [CIT(A)], are bad in law and void ab initio. 2. That on facts and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in holding that the assessee failed to get its accounts audited u/s 44AB of the Act, without considering the, fact that the LD AO has issued notice u/s 271A of the Act which implied that in his opinion no books of accounts were not maintained by the assessee. 3. That on facts and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case that when in the opinion of the LD AO, the assessee has not maintained the books of accounts, than there could ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and consequential penalty the learned CIT(A) remitted the issue to the Assessing Officer for verification and consequential recalculation of penalty, inter alia, by observing as under: "10. In ground No.3 the appellant has mentioned that the total turnover of the assessee in accordance with the Guidance Note under section 44AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India is as under: 1. Sales (delivery transaction) Rs. 67,12,153/- 2. Squared up transaction (Credits) Rs. 38,689/- 3. Squared up transaction (Debits) Rs. 4,47,089/-   Total Rs. 72,37,931/- Although, no penalty is to be imposed as submitted above and in any case if penalty is to be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thority that has already proceeding u/s. 271A of the Act, penalty u/s. 271A of the Act been initiated for non maintain books of accounts by assessee u/s. 44AA of the Act, penalty u/s. 271B cannot be imposed. 7. Per contra, the learned DR relied upon the orders passed by both the lower authorities. 8. The AR further submitted that Hon'ble Allahabad High Court held in the order [(2007) 165 Taxmann 1 All)] CIT, Bareilly Vs. Bisauli Tractors that the Section 271B of the Act is not attracted in a case where no account has been maintained and instead recourse u/s. 271A can be taken. 9. Further, in support of his contentions the Ld. AR has relied upon following decisions :- i. "Mr. Mohit Garg Vs. ITO (ITAT Delhi) 12. At ....