Assessee, an individual, engaged in business of construction filed her return of income declaring loss. Assessing Officer held that the assessee was a developer and had incurred huge expenditure by way of compensation as well as received advance for various projects and, therefore, looking at total business receipt, assessee should have got her accounts audited under section 44AB, which admittedly was not done by assessee; hence, he initiated penalty proceedings under section 271B of the Act. CIT(A) affirmed the order of the Assessing Officer. On appeal the Tribunal held that assessee was following project completion method, assessee had shown cost of project as work-in-progress and advances received for sale of property had been disclosed and thus, was under a bona fide belief that provisions of section 44AB did not apply and hence, no audit under section 44AB was got done. This being a reasonable cause penalty levy of penalty is not valid. (AY. 2012-13)
Sushila Sureshbabu Malge (Smt.) v. ITO (2022) 193 ITD 416 (Mum.)(Trib.)
S. 271B : Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited-Project completion method-Advance received-Not turnover or gross receipt-Bonafide belief-Failure to get audited-Levy of penalty is not valid. [S. 44AB]