Issue pertains to sustainability of the penalty imposed against the appellant under Section 271B of the Income Tax Act, 1961('the Act', for short).The proceedings was initiated based on an allegation that the appellant had failed to furnish report of audited accounts as required under Section 44AB with respect to the assessment year 2014-15. A show cause notice was issued preceding imposition of the penalty, requiring the assessee to show cause as to why penalty under Section 271B should not be imposed. In the reply the appellant said that, as per the second proviso to Section 44AB, if a person is required by or under any other law to get his accounts audited, getting the accounts audited under that law before the specified date and furnishing of a report of such audit, would be sufficient compliance of the requirement under that Section and that no penalty can be imposed. But the Assessing Authority found that, the appellant had failed to furnish the report of audit in the prescribed Form, duly signed and verified by an Accountant as required under Section 44AB or to furnish the report of audit conducted under any other law along with the further report by an Accountant in the Form prescribed, as required under the second proviso to Section 44AB. Therefore it is held that the appellant is liable to be imposed with penalty under Section 271 B and ordered to pay penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- as provided under the said Section.