AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1605
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enalty U/s. 271D at Rs. 11,50,000/- the penalty imposed is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive; 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) NFAC ought to have considered that the contention of the assessee that the purchaser was agriculturist and done first time in transaction with assessee and insisted on cash payment, therefore imposition of penalty U/s. 271D is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive; 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) NFAC ought to have considered that assessee falls under exception as purchaser is new to the seller, therefore without giving opportunity to being heard and without reasonable cause imposed U/s. 271D is unjustified, unwarranted and excessive; 7. The appellant craves leave to amend, add or take a new ground or grounds at the time of hearing." 3. During the course of hearing, at the very outset, the learned Counsel, Shri Bhavesh Moryani, appearing for the assessee, invited our attention t ground no.2, of the grounds of appeal and submitted that if the case is decided in his favour on the strength of this ground he need not delve into other grounds. It is pertinent to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r deposit or any specified sum, otherwise than by an account payee cheque or account payee bank draft or use of electronic clearing system through a bank account, if,- (a) the amount of such loan or deposit or specified sum or the aggregate amount of such loan, deposit and specified sum; or (b) on the date of taking or accepting such loan or deposit or specified sum, any loan or deposit or specified sum taken or accepted earlier by such person from the depositor is remaining unpaid (whether repayment has fallen due or not), the amount or the aggregate amount remaining unpaid, or (c) the amount or the aggregate amount referred to in clause (a) together with the amount or the aggregate amount referred to in clause (b), is twenty thousand rupees or more. As mentioned above, the assessee has sold Agricultural land to SauShalini Sanjay Shegokar, Akot for sale consideration of Rs 11,51,000/- and received the amount in cash. In view of the above facts, I am satisfied that the assessee has violated provision of Sec. 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by accepting cash otherwise than by account payee cheque or account payee bank draft aggregate am....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003 disposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed, or within one year from the end of the financial year in which the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) is received by the "[Principal Chief Commissioner or] Chief Commissioner or "[Principal Commissioner or] Commissioner, whichever is later (b) in a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subject- matter of revision under section 263, after the expiry of six months from the end of the month in which such order of revision is passed; (c) in any other case, after the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated are completed, or six months from the end of the month in which action for imposition of penalty is initiated, whichever period expires later.] (IA) In a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subject- matter of an appeal to the Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unity granted under section 245H remained in force; and (iii) any period during which a proceeding under this Chapter for the levy of penalty is stayed by an order or injunction of any court, shall be excluded.]]" 9. The limitation for passing the order imposing penalty under chapter- XXI has been provided by considering all possible situation where the assessment order or other order is subject matter of appeal of the order is revised under section 263 or assessment order or other orders are subject matter of appeal before the Hon'ble High Court or Hon'ble Supreme Court. Thus, it is clear that section 275, pre supposes the existence of assessment proceedings/revision proceedings or appeal proceedings arising from the assessment order or revision order and the limitation is provided as per outcome of these proceedings. In absence of assessment in the case of the assessee the initiation of penalty is not valid and further when the satisfaction for initiation of the penalty on the part of the AO is absent in the case of the assessee then the penalty levied u/s 271D is not valid. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Jain Laxmi Rice Mills (supra) has held as u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....061 285 ITR 295/155 Taxman 383, the Tribunal further observed that action for penalty may be permissible only after regular assessment has been framed and since no regular assessment order had been passed in this case, the recourse to penalty proceedings under Section 27IE were not justified. The findings recorded by the Tribunal read thus:- "Having heard the parties and having perused the material on record, we find the grievance of the assessee to be correct. In this case, the return of the assessee was processed u/s. 143(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act, on 31.12.2003. Notice u/s. 274 read with 271E of the Act was issued to the assessee on 12.06,2007. It being a case of processing the return of income, there is no finding in the AO's order with regard to the applicability or otherwise of section 269T of the IT Act to the assessee's case. It was within the purview of the AO to bring the assessee's case to scrutiny and to make regular assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act. It was also within the power of the AO at the appropriate stage to initiate proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act against the assessee. No such action was taken. Rather, the penalty was imposed on the basi....