Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6486 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
2 year(s) 9 month(s) 9 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
20-03-2022
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
DB-A
Assessment Year
2014-2015
Appeal Filed On
10-06-2019
Judgement Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCHES “A” : HYDERABAD (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.979/HYD/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Mohd Zaheeruddin Zeeshan Ayub, HYDERABAD [PAN: APOPA9804K] Vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(2), HYDERABAD (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Nalin Shah, For Revenue : Shri Swapnil Patil, DR Date of Hearing : 08-02-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 21-03-2022 O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for AY.2014-15 arises from the CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad’s order dated 25-04-2019 passed in case No.10301/2018-19/C/CIT(A)-6, involving proceedings u/s.271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, ‘the Act’]. Heard both the parties. Case files perused. ITA No. 979/Hyd/2019 :- 2 -: 2. Coming to the assessee’s sole substantive grievance that both the lower authorities have erred in law and on facts in imposing Section 271B penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- we note that the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion to this effect reads as under: ITA No. 979/Hyd/2019 :- 3 -: ITA No. 979/Hyd/2019 :- 4 -: ITA No. 979/Hyd/2019 :- 5 -: 3. Learned Counsel vehemently contended during the course of hearing that this assessee is drawing salary income on regular basis and it was only in the impugned assessment year that he had carried out corresponding transactions requiring audit report u/s.44AB of the Act. He therefore pleaded assessee’s ignorance only as a reasonable cause u/s.273 for deleting the impugned penalty. 4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to assessee’s vehement contentions and find no merit therein. It is an admitted fact that the assessee’s case is very well covered u/s.44AB of the Act as his turnover has indeed exceeded the basic threshold limit of Rs.40 lakhs in the relevant previous year. There is further no dispute that neither the assessee had got prepared his audit report nor the same had been furnished well within time to the assessing authority; as the case may be. We therefore hold that mere ignorance of law pleaded ITA No. 979/Hyd/2019 :- 6 -: herein at the assessee’s behest hardly deserves to be treated as a reasonable cause for disturbing the impugned penalty as upheld in the CIT(A)’s lower appellate discussion. The same stands confirmed therefore. 5. This assessee’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 21 s t March, 2022 Sd/- Sd/- ( A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ( S.S. GODARA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 21-03-2022 TNMM ITA No. 979/Hyd/2019 :- 7 -: Copy to : 1.Mohd. Zaheeruddin Zeeshan Ayub, C/o.Gokhale & Co., Chartered Accountants, 3-6-322, Off. No.403, Mahavir House, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 2.The Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(2), Hyderabad. 3.CIT(Appeals)-6, Hyderabad. 4.Pr.CIT-6, Hyderabad. 5.D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad. 6.Guard File.
