Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ranchi

Bokaro Industrial Area Development ... vs Addl Comm.Income Tax, Bokaro on 7 December, 2016

        IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, RANCHI
                     'SMC' BENCH, RANCHI

          BEFORE SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER


                       ITA No. 218/Ran/2016
                      Assessment Year : 2004-05


     M/s. Bokaro Industrial Area    Vs.   ACIT, Range-3, Bokaro
     Development      Authority,
     Biada   Bhawan,     Balidih,
     Bokaro

     PAN/GIR No. AAFFB 1018 B

              (Appellant)           ..          ( Respondent)



                Assessee by: S/Shri S.K.Podar/Devesh Podar, AR
                    Revenue by : Shri Chaudhury Oram, DR


                     Date of Hearing :        7/12/ 2016
                   Date of Pronouncement : 7/12/ 2016


                                ORDER

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)- Hazaribag, dated 11.3.2016, for the assessment year 2004-05.

2. The sole issue involved in this appeal is that the ld CIT (A) was not justified in dismissing the appeal of the assessee filed against the imposition of penalty of Rs.87,927/- being 0.5% of the turnover on the ground that assessee failed to comply with the provision of section 44AB of the Act.

ITA No. 218/Ran/ 2016

Asse ssmen t Yea r : 2 004 -05

3. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. In the instant case, the Assessing officer found that during the year under consideration, the total receipts of the assessee was Rs.1,75,85,433/-, which was more than Rs.40 lakhs and, therefore, the assessee was required to get audited its accounts and file tax audit report u/s.44AB of the Act in Form No.3CD on or before 31.10.2004. However, the assessee failed to comply with the same and, therefore, he levied penalty of Rs.87,927/- being 0.5% of the turnover of Rs.1,75,85,433/-.

4. On appeal, ld CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that hearing of the appeal was fixed on 30.3.2010, 19.6.2014, 23.7.2015 & 11.3.2016 but ld A.R. of the assessee only sought adjournment. The CIT(A) also observed that the only argument of the assessee is that it is not a business concern and, therefore, section, 44AB is not applicable in its case. The ld CIT(A) observed that no evidence was furnished by the assessee. Therefore, he upheld the order of the Assessing officer.

5. Before me, ld A.R. of the assessee did not make any serious arguments on the ground of appeal of the assessee. He also stated that the audit report u/s.44AB was not at all obtained by the assessee for the year under consideration. In view of the above facts, I find no good 3 ITA No. 218/Ran/ 2016 Asse ssmen t Yea r : 2 004 -05 reason to interfere with the order of the ld CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds of appeal of the assessee.

6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 7/12/2016 in the presence of parties.

Sd/-

                                                       (N.S Saini)
                                                   ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Ranchi; Dated        7/12 /2016
B.K.Parida, SPS
Copy of the Order forwarded to :

1. The Appellant : M/s. Bokaro Industrial Area Development Authority, Biada Bhawan, Balidih, Bokaro

2. The Respondent. ACIT, Range-3, Bokaro

3. The CIT(A), Hazaribag

4. CIT,Hazaribag

5. DR, ITAT, Ranchi

6. Guard file.

    //True Copy//                                                   BY ORDER,


                                                               SR.PS, ITAT,
                                                            CAMP AT RANCHI