1 itxal908.07.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL(L) NO. 908 OF 2007 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 910 OF 2007 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 913 OF 2007 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 909 OF 2007 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 911 OF 2007 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 912 OF 2007. The Commissioner of Income Tax IV ...Appellant. Vs. M/s Abhijit Trading Company ..Respondent Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Appellant. Mr. R.S. Soni for the Respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 21ST JULY, 2011. P.C. 1. In all these cases, the question of law raised by the Revenue is, whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under section 2 itxal908.07.sxw 271(B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Perusal of the order of the ITAT shows that the ITAT has deleted the penalty by observing that non filing of Audit Reports within the specified time under section 44AB of the Act for the assessment year in question was due to delay in submission of the books in A.Y. 1995-95 due to non receipt of TDS certificates and that the delay was reasonable and in the said circumstances the penalty imposed under section 271 (B) was not justified. 3. In our opinion, the discretion exercised by the ITAT is reasonable and does not call for interference. In the result, all the appeals are dismissed. ( A.A. SAYED, J. ) ( J.P. DEVADHAR , J.)