Tribunal dismisses revenue's appeal to increase penalty, allows assessee's appeal due to financial distress

The tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal seeking to increase the penalty under Section 271D from Rs. 9,00,000 to Rs. 19,00,000 due to the tax demand being only Rs. 10.00 lacs, falling below the threshold for appeals set by a CBDT circular. Additionally, the tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, overturning the penalty of Rs. 9,00,000 imposed under Section 271D for receiving advances, considering the amounts as gifts and advances due to financial distress, ultimately deleting the penalty due to the unique circumstances and absence of tax evasion intent.

---

---

Issues:
1. Reduction of penalty under Section 271D from Rs. 19,00,000 to Rs. 9,00,000.
2. Imposition of penalty under Section 271D of Rs. 9,00,000 on the assessee.

Issue 1: Reduction of penalty under Section 271D from Rs. 19,00,000 to Rs. 9,00,000
The appellate tribunal heard cross-appeals by the revenue and the assessee against the order dated 16/10/2012 for the A.Y. 2008-09. The revenue appealed the reduction of penalty under Section 271D from Rs. 19,00,000 to Rs. 9,00,000. The tribunal noted that the tax demand in question was only Rs. 10.00 lacs and referred to a CBDT circular instructing that appeals should not be filed before ITAT where the demand/tax effect does not exceed Rs. 10 lacs. Since the appeal did not fall under any exceptions mentioned in the circular, the tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal as not maintainable.

Issue 2: Imposition of penalty under Section 271D of Rs. 9,00,000 on the assessee
Regarding the assessee's appeal, the only issue was the penalty levied under Section 271D of Rs. 9,00,000. The penalty was imposed for advances received from certain individuals, violating Section 269SS of the Act. The tribunal noted conflicting views by the Assessing Officer regarding the nature of the amounts, whether bogus cash credits or cash loans received. The assessee argued that the amounts were gifts and advances received from relatives and neighbors due to financial distress. The tribunal considered the circumstances, including the widowhood of the assessee and her husband's martyrdom, and held that no penalty should be imposed under Section 271D. Various case laws were cited to support this decision. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's appeal, deleting the penalty imposed under Section 271D.

In conclusion, the tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's appeal, emphasizing the unique circumstances and the absence of intent to evade tax in the case.

---