2024 (12) TMI 1062

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rred in imposing penalty under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating the facts of the case. 2. The addition is based on submissions and conjectures that cash of Rs. 33,80,000/- has been received by the Appellant although there is not a single iota of evidence of the same. 3. The Assessing Officer was not justified in ignoring the submissions of the Appellant which involved ancestral Joint Family Property. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of law, the Assessing Officer has failed to appreciate that the order levying penalty passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271D is illegal, bad in law and wrong on facts. 5. That the Assessing Officer has failed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rcle rate applicable. The assessee has not accepted to have received cash of Rs. 33,80,000/- as part of sale consideration on sale of inheritance share of the assessee in the property located at 2743 to 2746 situated at Kucha Chelian, Darya Ganj, New Delhi. The assessing officer however, did not accept the contention of the assessee and held that the assessee accepted the sale consideration of Rs 33,80,000/-on sale of property in cash and levied penalty u/s 271D. 6. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by the Assessing Officer, the assessee went in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). who confirmed the penalty u/s section 271-D and of the Act. Aggrieved the assessee is before us. 7. The ld AR of the assessee argued that the assessee is t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... transfer of ownership rights in the property to the vendee. This is evident from clause No. 3 of the sale deed. The assessee has not received documents related to original deed and or any further agreement to sell etc, from the senior members of the family, so that the assessee can co-relate and substantiate facts and figures in support of his contention that he has not received any cash payments of Rs. 33,80,000/- and or any other payment whatsoever. 11. The ld AR of the assessee further submitted that he has not received any cash amount from the vendee either at the time of registering the sale deed or any time before or after the date. The assessee also submitted the bank statement of his savings bank account maintained with the SBI,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....le the registration vide 29.08.2016 was between the assessee i.e., heir of the fifth brother and the vendee. Further, the sale deed dated 29.08.2016 refers to the deed dated 18.11.2015. For the purposes of stamp duty, the current market value of the property was determined at Rs. 1,69,00,000/- and attributed to 5 heirs in equal proportion of Rs 33,80,000/-. 15. We also find that the sale deed dated 29.08.2016 executed between the assessee and the Vendee nowhere mentions that the assessee has received Rs 33,80,000/- in cash or otherwise in AY 2017- 18. It only mentions that the market value to the extent of 1/5th share of the assessee in the said property comes to Rs 33,80,000/- for stamp duty. The document also mentions that the property....