TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (2) TMI 603
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 1. These Appeals under Section 260Aof the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges a common order dated 27th June, 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The common impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Revenue has urged the following identical questions of law in all these appeals for our consideration : (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal is justified in deleting the penalty u/s 271D holding that there was reasonable cause u/s 273B for entering into such transactions through journal entries. (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the penalt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....system of a bank if the amount involved is in excess of Rs. 20,000/. This imposition of penalty under Section 271D of the Act, was upheld by a common order dated 31st December, 2013 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). On further appeal, the impugned order dated 27th June, 2014 of the Tribunal, inter alia held that penalty under Section 271D of the Act is not imposable in view of Section 273B of the Act. This for the reason that there was a reasonable cause for the failure to comply with Section 269SS of the Act. (b) On merits of the issue, the parties before us are agreed that the Tribunal was correct in holding that receipt of any advance / loan by way of journal entries is in breach of Section 269SS of the Act as the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Section 273B of the Act gives rise to a question of law as it is a legal inference to be drawn from primary facts as held by the Apex Court in Premier Breweries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 372 ITR 180. Thus, it is submitted this question requires admission as it gives rise to a substantial question of law; (d) We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal has on application of the test laid down for establishment of reasonable cause, for breach of Section 269SS of the Act by this Court in Triumph International Finance (supra) found that there is a reasonable cause in the present facts to have made journal entries reflecting deposits. The Tribunal while relying upon the order of this Court in Triumph International Finance (s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th the reasons given by the Assessee for reasonable cause and this finding is not shown to be perverse. Finally, the issue of there being a reasonable cause or not is an issue of fact. No inference of law and / or issue of interpretation is to be made. The decision relied upon by the Revenue in case of Premier Breweries Ltd.(supra) concerned itself with the issue of a claim for deduction under Section 37 of the Act on the basis of the Agreements entered into between the parties. The inference of law in that case was whether on the facts, it could be inferred that the claim for deduction is in respect of expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business. Thus, it would involve a question of interpretation of the ag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e mischief of Section 269SS of the Act, so as to invite penalty under Section 271D of the Act. This, the Tribunal did by following its earlier orders in the case of V.N. Parekh Ltd. and Ketan Parekh as indicated in the order of this Court in Triumph International Finance (supra). Our attention was also invited to numerous reported decisions of the Tribunal in the cases of Sunflower Builders Vs. Dy.CIT, 1997 (61) ITD (Pune) 227, Asst.CIT Vs. Ruchika Chemicals & Investment (P) Ltd. 2004 (88) TTJ (Delhi)85 and Asst.CIT Vs. Lala Murari Lal & Sons, 2004(2) SOT (Luck) 543 wherein it has been held journal entries in the book of accounts indicating deposit / loans will not fall foul of Section 269SS of the Act. Besides, the Delhi High Court in Comm....