2022 (3) TMI 1178

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... "1. The order passed by Ld.CIT (A) is bad and illegal as no valid and specific show cause notice was given hence, the same is in violation of law, equity and principle of natural justice. 2. Assessment order is time- barred as no tax payable was determined by the officer who passed the penalty order. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the penalty u/s 271D of the Act of Rs. 4,00,000/-." 3. The fact in brief is that additional CIT has passed order u/s. 271D of the Act on 27th March, 2017 and levied penalty of Rs. 4 lacs on the assessee u/s. 271D on loan amount obtained in cash in violation of provision of section 269SS of the act. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer noticed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....013 20,000 18.08.2013 20,000 26.08.2013 20,000 05.10.2013 20,000 12.10.2013 20,000 30.12.2013 20,000 Total 1,70,000 (B) Amit Purswani Date Amount 01.04.2013 20,000 20.04.2013 20,000 10.06.2013 20,000 15.06.2013 20,000 30.06.2013 20,000 21.07.2013 20,000 18.09.2013 20,000 30.09.2013 20,000 10.10.2013 20,000 28.10.2013 10,000 19.11.2013 20,000 30.11.2013 20,000 Total 2,30,000 In view of the section 269SS, it is held that the assessee had accepted certain loans amounting to Rs. 2,30,000/- in cash from Shri Anish Nagpal and Rs. 1,70,000/-from Shri Amit Purswani. The appellant Company has submitted that any....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that cash transactions were pertained to the loan account and there is nothing on record to substantiate that it was not loan transaction. 6. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. Assessment u/s. 143(3) of the act was finalized on 21st December, 2016. Thereafter additional CIT has levied penalty u/s. 271D of the act on 27th March, 2017 of Rs. 4 lacs on account of accepting loan amounting to Rs. 2,30,000/- in cash from Shri Anish Nagpal and Rs. 1,70,000/- from Shri Amit Purswani in violation of provision of section 269SS of the act. After perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that during the year under consideration directors of the assessee company, Anish Nagpal has given Rs. 2,30,000/- and other director S....