2020 (4) TMI 227
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der of the Ld. AO who had invoked the provisions of section 271D of the Act in lieu of the cash loan obtained from his brother-in-law. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, a partner in M/s Bhavani wines, Hyderabad, filed his return of income for the AY 2008-09 on 30/03/2009 admitting the total income at Rs. 1,66,850/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the IT Act on 29/06/2009 and a demand of Rs. 910/- was raised. Subsequently, the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and an assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was made on 29/12/2010 determining the total income and tax payable at Rs. 2,04,594/- and Rs. 12,015/- respectively. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO noticed that the assessee had accepted cash l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ady filed at the time of hearing. Hence I request the Joint Commissioner of Income tax to accept the same and remove the penalty u/s 271D. " 6. The Ld.AO observed that as seen from the assessee's explanation, the assessee had affirmed the acceptance of cash loan by way of cash deposits in his bank account by Sri P Shashikanth. The Ld.AO further opined that the assessee did not bring out a case where there is a reasonable cause for accepting the loan amount in cash. The Ld.AO therefore, levied penalty of Rs. 6,00,000/- u/s 271D for contravention of Section269SS of the Act which is equal to the amount of loan taken by the assessee. 7. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). 8. Before the CIT(A)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 29 (Mad.); (iii) CIT vs. Balaji Traders (2008) 303 ITR 312 (Mad) and (iv) Shreenath Builders vs. DCIT (2000) 66 TTJ 113 (Ahd. Trib) to support his case. The ld. DR on the other hand relied on the orders of the Ld. Revenue Authorities and vehemently argued in support of the same. 11. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the mterials on record. It is not in dispute tht the assessee has obtained the cash from his own brother-in-law. It is also not in dispute that the assessee obtained the cash loan for the purpose of acquiring immovable property wherein he was constrained to resciend the agreement in the event the balance purchase consideration is not paid within the stipulated time and in such event the transaction has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cause for failure to comply with the provision of Section 269SS of the Act. The Tribunal further found that the loan given by the Samajwadi Party was a genuine loan, which was reflected in the books of accounts on account of the Samajwadi Party as well as in the books of account of the assessee and that the cash given by the party was deposited in the bank of the assessee and, thereafter, used for the purpose of converting the nazul land into free hold. The Tribunal found that the genuineness of the transaction was also not disputed by the Assessing Officer. 16. In the light of the aforesaid, we find that even though the assessee had taken a loan in cash, nonetheless, the loan transaction was a genuine transaction and was routed through ....