2020 (5) TMI 300

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ence is unsustainable. 2. That the learned Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in sustaining penalty of Rs. 12,00,000/- imposed by the Hon'ble Ld CIT(A) under Section 27ID without properly appreciating the facts, circumstances and the submissions of the appellant. 3. That No penalty for cash loans exceeding Rs. 20,000 from agriculturists living in village areas when transaction were not doubted as the assessee is also agriculturist. The All these persons were agriculturists and that the genuineness of the transactions at no point of time had been doubted by the revenue. They lived in Village(remote) areas. 4. That the Hon'ble Ld CIT(A) had erred on facts and circumstances of the case and in law in making an addition on account o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....close relative who got compulsory land compensation. 7. That the default, if any, is of technical and venial nature as the genuineness and availability of cash given by the farmer to Farmer to meet urgent needs which has not been doubted. 8. That the impugned Assessment order passed by Hon'ble Ld CIT(A), Noida is a clear cut case of misunderstanding and wrong interpretation of Law." 3. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings u/s 143 (3) for the A.Y. 2014-15 in the case of assessee, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee had taken loan in cash during the year under consideration of Rs. 7,00,000/- from Sh. Rahul, S/o Sh. Bhopal Singh, Village- Sadarpur, Sector-45, Noida and Rs. 5,00,000/- from Sh. Vipin Kumar, S/o S....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in the instant case since no explanation or reasons were furnished for non-compliance of the statutory provisions of Section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and imposed penalty of Rs. 12,00,000/- u/s 271D of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that the genuineness of the transaction is not disputed. Both the transaction was made between the farmers. The Ld. AR submitted that the ssessee is a resident of village Barola, Noida and is presently residing at A-173, 2nd Floor, Sector-47, Noida. He is an agriculturist and is engaged in agriculture with his father. During the year, assessee had purchased a re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee. b) Rs. 5,00,000/- from Shri Vipin Kumar (nephew), son of Mahipal on 09.07.2013. This loan was given by Shri Vipin Kumar out of compensation received by him against acquisition of his land by Noida Authority. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer was of the view that the amount was received by the assessee in cash and therefore, provisions of section 269SS are attracted. The assessee was under a bonafide belief that the borrower and the creditor both are agriculturist and therefore, provisions of section 269SS are not attracted. The Ld. AR further submitted that 2nd proviso to section 269SS lays down that the provisions of this section shall not apply to any loan or deposit or specified sum, where the person from whom ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 1984, from any other person any loan or deposit otherwise than by an account payee cheque or account payee bank draft if the amount of such loan or deposit or the aggregate amount of such loan and deposit is Rs. 10,000/- or more .........." Thus Section 269SS was introduced to debar the person from introducing unaccounted/unexplained income. In the present case, it is not the case of Department that the assessee has introduced his unaccounted income. Assessment for the year under consideration is completed u/s 143(3) of the Act in which Assessing Officer has not treated the loan as bogus or non-genuine. Lenders had given the loan out of their compensation received against compulsory acquisition of their land and the source of the said lo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... i. CIT vs. Bhagwati Prasad Bajoria, HUF (2003) 263 ITR 487 (Gau) ii. CIT vs. T R Rengarajan (2005) 279 ITR 587 (Mad) iii. CIT vs. Kundrathur Finance & Chit Co. (2006) 283 ITR 329 (Mad.) iv. Ashwani Kumar vs. ITO (2009) 309 ITR (AT) 69 (Del). v. Hindustan Steel Ltd. vs. State of Orissa (1972) 83 ITR 26 (SC) vi. CIT vs. Natwar Lal Purshottam Das Parekh (2008) 303 ITR 5 (Guj) vii. CIT vs. Smt M. Yashodha (2013) 351 ITR 265 (Mad) viii. Shivnandan Kaushik vs. DCIT (2002) 74 TTJ Chd 761 ix. Shri Jagmohan Sharma vs. JCIT (ITA No. 552 & 553/Kol/2015 order dated 10.01.2018) x. Dr. Deepak Muchala vs. ITO (1997) 58 TTJ (Bom-Tri) 524 xi. Mohan Karkare vs. DCIT (1995) 52 ITD 236 xii. Shri Bhupinder Singh vs. JCIT (ITA No. 926/Chd....