2002 (4) TMI 212

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ra, for asst. yr. 1991-92. 2. The effective ground of appeal states: "that the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the penalty of Rs. 52,290 imposed under s. 271B of the Act by AO especially when the assessee has not filed the audit report as prescribed under s. 44AB of the Act within the stipulated time under law." 2.1 Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....71B of the Act. Since the return had been filed under s. 139(4) and no reasons had been given for not filing the audited report within the time allowed under s. 139(1) of the Act, the AO imposed penalty under s. 271B of the Act. On appeal, the CIT(A) deleted the penalty by observing, thus: "In the case under appeal, the return was filed after the due date under s. 139(1). No notice under s. 142....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....igh Court reported in the case of CIT vs. Jai Durge Construction (2000) 164 CTR (All) 512 : (2000) 245 ITR 857 (All), wherein the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court has held, thus: "The obligation created by s. 44AB of the IT Act, 1961, as it stood prior to 1st July, 1995, was merely to get the accounts audited before the specified date. There was no obligation to furnish that audit report before the....