2025 (8) TMI 1187

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....'). 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds in appeal: 1. That the learned CIT (A), NFAC has erred in law and on facts in upholding the penalty of Rs 1,37,285/- levied u/s 271B without appreciating the facts of the appellant in proper perspective. 2. That orders passed by learned CIT (A), NFAC and learned Assessing Officer are against the principles of natural justice. 3. The Appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, delete, rescind, forgo or withdraw any of the above grounds of objection either before or during the course of proceedings. 4. That the order passed by learned CIT (A), NFAC sustaining the order of the Assessing Officer is bad in law and on facts and is liable to be set-aside. 3. The brief fact of the case....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....siness of the assessee who was absolutely not aware that section 44AB is applicable to him. There was no willful default and mensrea for not getting the tax Audit done. He further submitted that no penalty shall be imposable on the person if he proves that there was reasonable cause for the failure as provided under section 273B of the Act. 6.Aggrieved the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The Ld. AR of the assessee reiterated the same arguments which were advanced before the Ld. CIT(A). He further submitted that the matter is covered in favour of the assessee by the order dated 22-05-2023 of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Mohammad Daud vs. ITO Ward -58 (1) in ITA No. 1691/Del/ 2022for A.....