2016 (2) TMI 1402

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) has erred in deleting the penalty of addition of Rs. 77,75,000/- u/s 271D of the Act. ii. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend any ground of appeal raised above at the time of hearing. 2. Facts in brief are that the assessee company accepted a loan/advance of Rs. 77,75,000/- from M/s. Sona Softweb (P) Ltd., a company under the same group of management, through account payee cheque dated 04.05.2005. Subsequently, on 05.05.2005, Directors of the both the companies agreed and squared up the account of M/s. Sona Softweb (P.) Ltd. in the books of the assessee company by passing a journal entry through which account of M/s Sona Softweb Pvt. Ltd. was debited and individual accounts of the three Directors of the assessee ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me Tax(Appeals) submitting the facts of the case. Before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals), the assessee submitted that due compliance of all the notices were made by the assessee and the Additional Commissioner was not correct in holding that no compliance of the notices were made. As regard the merit of the case, the assessee submitted that the provisions of section 269SS were introduced to curb the transactions of black money and not for targeting genuine transfer of money through the journal entries. The assessee relied on the various decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts and submitted that there was no actual transaction in cash, therefore, the provisions of Section 269SS of the Act were not applicable. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5,95,000/- (ii) Sh. A.S. Mittal Rs. 25,90,000/- (iii) Sh. Dipak Mittal Rs. 25,90,000/- 5. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Noida Toll Bride (supra), the Hon'ble High Court has clearly held that the provisions of Section 269SS are not attracted in case of receipt of loan through journal entries. The relevant para of the judgment is reproduced as under: "5. Aggrieved, the assessed preferred appeal to the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) but without any success. The assessed carried the matter in further appeal to the Tribunal. By the impugned order, the Tribunal had deleted the said penalty. While holding that the provisions of Section 269SS of the Act were not attracted, the Tribunal has noticed that:....