TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 1211
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deriving income by sale of electronic security, surveillance, automation systems and providing electronic security services. It filed its return of income by admitting NIL income. The return filed by the assessee was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') thereafter, assessment is completed under section 143(3) of the Act. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer has noted that the assessee-company has violated the provisions of section 269SS of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer had brought the same to the notice of the Additional Commissioner, Range-2, Vijayawada, who issued a notice under section 271D of the Act directing the assessee wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter claiming set off of carried forward loss of Rs. 78,06,130/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. On 21/11/2011 appellant received a sum of Rs. 13,00,000/- from its director Sri Chennupati Jaganmohan Rao through account payee cheque No. 123667 issued on Canara Bank, Government Branch, Vijayawada. This Gurunanak Nagar, Vijayawada and the same was credited on 22/11/2011 by the appellant's bank before clearance. However, on clearing it was returned on 22.11.2011 itself as evidenced by the Bank statement enclosed herewith. The reason for the dishonor of cheque is it is a non MICR cheque. This fact was came to know to the appellant on 23.11.2011. As there were immediate commitments to be honoured appellant took cash from the direct....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ome Tax, Range, Shimla (2016) 158ITDS 976 (Chandigarh - Trib) 4. CIT vs. Balaji Tra303 ITR 312 (mad) 5. CIT vs. Sunil Kumar Goel 315 ITR 163(P&H) In view of the above submissions, your appellant prays deletion of penalty of Rs. 12,00,000/- levied by the Learned Assessing Officer u/s.271D of the Income Tax Act for the Assessment Year 2012-16." 4. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the same, cancelled the penalty levied by the Additional Commissioner by observing that the exceeding overdraft, though may not be sudden, is definitely a compelling circumstances and reasonable cause for obtaining loan, by cash, from the Director and the expediency of the action is not for the revenue to consider and the matter is entirely left to the judgme....