2004 (8) TMI 328

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the learned CIT(A) deleting penalty of Rs. 5.11 lakhs levied by the AO under s. 271D of the IT Act, 1961. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that during the course of assessment, it was noticed that the assessee-company had accepted loans/deposits in cash in violation of the provisions of s. 269SS. The AO thereafter initiated penalty proceedings under s. 271D/269SS and ultimately i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....espect of deposit in quantum. The assessee pointed out that the above submissions were duly supported by the order of the AO in para 7, wherein she observed that since no addition had been made there was no ground of any relief and hence the limitation period in this case could not be extended. The assessee further relied on the decision in the case of Manohar Lal vs. Dy. CIT (1995) 53 TTJ (Jp) 10....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uantum and consequently there were no items which were the subject-matter of appeal. It was, therefore, held by the CIT(A) that the penalty order passed by the AO was barred by limitation as the case was covered by the decisions of the Jaipur and Pune Benches, and cancelled the penalty imposed by the AO. 4. Before us, learned Departmental Representative strongly rebutted the order of the CIT(A)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t-matter of an appeal before the CIT(A) under s. 246 or was before the Tribunal under s. 253 and the period of six months could be counted from the end of the month in which the order of the CIT(A) or the Tribunal, as the case may be, is received by the Chief CIT or CIT, or before the end of the financial year in which the proceedings had been initiated, whichever period expires later; whereas the....