PARAS CHAND JAIN, KEKRI V. ITO, Ajmer

ITA 782/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1853 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-12-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 30-08-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: POONAM ROY DCIT DHK
• Keywords: Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES (SMC), JAIPUR JH HKKXPAN] YS[KK LNL; ] DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 782/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 PARAS CHAND JAIN, KLA JI KA CHOWK, SAWAR, KEKRI. CUKE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), AJMER. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ADPPJ 8047 C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS. JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SMT. POONAM ROY (DCIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 26/10/2017 MN?KKS'K.KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 12/12/2017 VKNS'K@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE EMANATES FR OM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A), AJMER DATED 13/06/2016 FOR THE A. Y. 2013-14. THE ONLY ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE APPEAL IS SUSTAINING THE PENALTY U/S 271B OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) R.W.R. 27 4 OF THE INCOME TAX RULES, 1962 (IN SHORT THE RULES). 2. NONE ATTENDED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS HAS BEEN CONSIDERED WHILE DECIDING THE A PPEAL. ITA 782/JP/2016_ PARAS CHAND JAIN VS ITO 2 3. THE LD DR WAS HEARD AND SHE SUBMITTED THAT THERE WA S NO REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT TO FILE T AX AUDIT REPORT ONLINE. THE ASSESSEE PUT THE BLAME ON AUDITOR THAT HE HAS FA ILED TO DO SO, BUT IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED A REASONABLE CAUSE TO EXPLA IN THE NON- COMPLIANCE. SHE PRAYED TO SUSTAIN THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 4. AFTER CONSIDERING THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD DR, THE BENCH IS OF THE VIEW T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE WAS A REASONABL E CAUSE FOR THE FAILURE TO FILE THE AUDIT REPORT ONLINE IN TIME. SI MPLY STATING THAT THE AUDITOR FAILED TO DO SO CANNOT EXEMPT THE ASSESSEE FROM LEVY OF PENALTY. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS SUSTAINED THE PENALTY BY HOLDING AS UNDER: 4.3 I HAVE GONE THROUGH THE PENALTY ORDER, STATEME NT OF FACTS, GROUND OF APPEAL AND THE WRITTEN SUBMISSION CAREFUL LY. IT IS SEEN THAT THE APPELLANT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SHOW T HAT IT HAD FILED THE AUDIT REPORT OBTAINED U/S 44AB FOR THE A. Y. 2013-14. THE CONTENTION OF THE APPELLANT THAT THE AUDIT REPO RT COULD NOT BE UPLOADED DUE TO SOME TECHNICAL PROBLEM IS ALSO N OT SUPPORTED WITH ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. THEREFORE, THIS CONTENTION OF APPELLANT IS ALSO NOT FOUND ACCEPTABL E. NO OTHER REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NON SUBMISSION OF THE AUDIT RE PORT HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE APPELLANT. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS , I AM OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE A.O. HAS RIGHTLY LEVIE D THE PENALTY OF U/S 271B FOR NON FILING OF AUDIT REPORT AS REQUIRED ITA 782/JP/2016_ PARAS CHAND JAIN VS ITO 3 U/S 44AB. ACCORDINGLY, THE PENALTY LEVIED BY THE A. O. IS CONFIRMED. CONSIDERING ALL THESE FACTUAL ASPECTS, THE BENCH SU STAIN THE LEVY OF PENALTY AND UPHOLD THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIS MISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12/12/2017. SD/- HKKXPAN (BHAGCHAND) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 12 TH DECEMBER, 2017 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SHRI PARAS CHAND JAIN, KEKRI (AJMER). 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ITO, WARD-2(3), AJMER. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY @ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 782/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR