DCIT, CORP CIR-1(2), CHENNAI V. BHARI INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS PVT LTD, CHENNAI

ITA 3485/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1470 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 21-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S BHARATH
• Keywords: Revised return

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , A BENCH, CHENNAI [ , , BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NOS.3485 & 3486/CHNY/2018 ( [ [ / ASSESSMENT YEARS:2004-05 & 2005-06) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(2), CHENNAI 34. VS M/S. BHARI INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS PVT. LTD., NO.3,4,5 BUHARIA TOWER, 2 ND FLOOR, MOORES ROAD, CHENNAI 600 006. PAN: AAACB1449B ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. BHARATH, CIT / RESPONDENT BY : NONE /DATE OF HEARING : 13.06.2019 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.06.2019 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE ARE APPEALS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3, CHENNAI IN APPEAL NO.28 & 29/07-08/A-1 DATED 28.09.2018 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2004-05 & 2005-06 AGAINST THE DELETION OF PENALTY LEVIED U/S.271B OF THE ACT. 2 ITA NOS.3485 & 3486/CHNY/2018 2. NONE REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI S. BHARATH REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.DR THAT ON ACCOUNT OF NON- FURNISHING OF THE AUDIT REPORT U/S.44AB ALONG WITH RETURN FILED U/S.139(1) OF THE ACT, PENALTY U/S.271B OF THE ACT HAS BEEN INITIATED. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT REVISED RETURN HAS BEEN FILED ON 28.03.2006 ALONG WITH THE FORM 3CD SIGNED BY THE CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT AS THE ACCOUNTS HAS NOT BEEN AUDITED BEFORE THE SPECIFIED DATE AND FURNISHED BY THAT DATE, PENALTY U/S.271B OF THE ACT HAS BEEN LEVIED FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMENT YEARS. IT WAS THE SUBMISSION THAT LD.CIT(A) HAD DELETED THE PENALTY BY HOLDING THAT THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE AUDIT REPORT WAS NOT INTENTIONAL OR DELIBERATE TO VIOLATE THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 44AB OF THE ACT. HE VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF THE LD.AO. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS. A PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) MORE SO IN PARA NO.3.3 SHOWS THAT THE LD.CIT(A) HAD TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEES ACCOUNTANT WAS ILL AND WAS ADMITTED TO HOSPITAL FOR SIX 3 ITA NOS.3485 & 3486/CHNY/2018 MONTHS AND AFTER HIS RECOVERY HE HAD FURNISHED THE TAX AUDIT. IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT LD.CIT(A) HAD TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION AND FOLLOWED THE RATIO OF THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE THANJAVUR SILK HANDLOOM WEAVERS COOPERATION PRODUCTION AND SALES SOCIETY LTD., REPORTED IN [2003] 263 ITR 334. THE REVENUE HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO DISLODGE THE FINDING OF FACT AS ARRIVED BY THE LD.CIT(A). IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) AND CONSEQUENTLY UPHELD THE SAME. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 13 TH JUNE, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- /CHENNAI, /DATED 13 TH JUNE, 2019 RSR /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. ( ) /CIT(A) 4. /CIT 5. /DR 6. [ /GF ( ) (S. JAYARAMAN) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER