S THILLAIKKARASI, SALEM V. ITO, WARD 2(1), SALEM

ITA 3504/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6579 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 26-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' , $ '% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.3504/CHNY/2018 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SMT. S. THILLAIKKARASI, PROP: K.M. TRADERS, D.NO.10A/2A, KAKKAPALAYAM ROAD, ILLAMPILLAI POST, SALEM - 637 502. PAN : ADIPT 7830 N V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), NO.3, GANDHI ROAD, SALEM 7. (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : NONE -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SRIDHAR DORA, JCIT 1 / 2$ / DATE OF HEARING : 25.04.2019 34) / 2$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 30.04.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), SALEM, DA TED 24.10.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2 I.T.A. NO.3504/CHNY/18 2. NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE INSPITE OF SERV ICE OF NOTICE BY RPAD. WE HEARD LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE AND PROCEEDED TO DISPOSE THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 3. SHRI SRIDHAR DORA, THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESEN TATIVE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT OBTAIN THE AU DIT REPORT WITHIN THE DUE DATE AND ALSO COULD NOT FILE BEFORE THE DUE DATE FOR FILING THE RETURN OF INCOME. ON A QUERY FROM THE BENCH, THE L D. D.R. CLARIFIED THAT THE AUDIT REPORT WAS FILED ON 13.03.2014. THE LD. D.R. ALSO CLARIFIED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER PASSED THE ASS ESSMENT ORDER ON 30.12.2016. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF T HE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THIS IS NOT A FIT CASE FOR LEVY OF PEN ALTY UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT '). THE VERY OBJECT OF FILING OF AUDIT REPORT IS TO ASSIST THE A SSESSING OFFICER TO COMPLETE THE ASSESSMENT AND LEVY TAX. IN THIS CASE , THE AUDIT REPORT WAS ADMITTEDLY FILED ON 13.03.2014 AND THE ASSESSME NT WAS COMPLETED ON 30.12.2016. THEREFORE, THE AUDIT REPO RT WAS VERY MUCH AVAILABLE BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON THE DATE OF ASSESSMENT ORDER. THEREFORE, THERE IS NO IMPEDIMEN T ON THE PART OF THE ASSESSEE IN COMPLETING THE ASSESSMENT BY THE AS SESSING 3 I.T.A. NO.3504/CHNY/18 OFFICER. HENCE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE LEVY OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE ACT IS NO T CALLED FOR. IT IS WELL SETTLED PRINCIPLE OF LAW THAT FILING OF AUDIT REPORT IS MANDATORY BUT THE TIME LIMIT IS ONLY DISCRETIONARY. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS UNABLE TO UPHOLD THE ORDERS OF THE LOWE R AUTHORITIES. ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW A RE SET ASIDE AND THE PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SECTION 271B OF THE ACT IS DELETED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 30 TH APRIL, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' ) ( . . . ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 6 /DATED, THE 30 TH APRIL, 2019. KRI. / -278 98)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 :2 () /CIT(A), SALEM 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, SALEM 5. 8; -2 /DR 6. <( = /GF. 4 I.T.A. NO.3504/CHNY/18