TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 629
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act) are directed against the common order dated 31.3.2016 made in ITA.Nos.264 to 270/Mds/2015 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai 'B' Bench (for brevity, the Tribunal) respectively for the assessment years from 2006-07 to 2012-13. 3. The appeals are entertained to decide the following substantial questions of law : "i. Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in restoring the action of the Original Authority/Assessing Officer in imposing penalty under Section 271D of the Act for the assessment years 2006-07 and 2012-13 on the presumption of violation of Section 269SS of the Act while overlooking the provisions of Section 273B of the Act ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....14, the very same assessment years, which are under consideration in this bunch of appeals were also involved and the cases were decided in favour of the assessee. 8. Therefore, the sheet anchor of the argument of the assessee before the Tribunal was requesting the Tribunal to apply the decisions in the assessee's own case and grant the relief. The Tribunal, though referred to the decisions cited by the assessee before it, thought fit to follow the case of the assessee's father in ITA.Nos.220 to 228/ Mds/2014 dated 29.5.2014 and sustained the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer. 9. On a reading of the common order passed by the Tribunal, we find that the Tribunal did not render any finding as to why the decisions in the assessee's ow....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on'ble First Bench of this Court in the case of the assessee's brother - M.Sougoumarin Vs. ACIT [TCA.Nos.838 & 839 of 2017 dated 13.3.2018]. It is submitted by the learned Senior Standing Counsel that the penalty, which was imposed on the appellant - assessee was affirmed by the Tribunal as confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court by dismissing the assessee's appeal. Therefore, it is also submitted that the Court should follow the said decision in the case of M.Sougoumarin and sustain the order passed by the Tribunal in the instant case. 12. The admitted legal principle is that the Tribunal is the last fact finding Authority in the hierarchy of remedies under the Act. The scope of adjudication by this Court has been clearly circumscri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ively dated 31.10.2013 and 22.7.2014 could not be applied to the facts and circumstances of the present case. 14. In the case of the assessee's brother - the said M.Sougoumarin, which was relied upon by the Revenue before us, the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court held that the Tribunal, on consideration of facts, was of the view that there was no such reason for regular loan transactions of borrowing and repayment in cash of amounts exceeding Rs. 20,000/- so as to escape penal liability under Sections 271E and 271D of the Act and that there was no question of law, not to speak of any substantial question of law, involved in those appeals. 15. However, in the instant case, there are two decisions of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal, wh....