Subject: Sh. Siddarath Bishnoi otherwise than by account payee chqeue or bank draft.
Referred Sections:
Section 269SS of the Income Tax Act,
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH "G", NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER
AND
SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
I.T.A. No. 2506/DEL/2015
A.Y. : 2010-11
ITO, WARD-24(2), M/S SRB INVESTMENT &
ROOM NO. 236, VS. PROPERTIES PVT. LTD.,
C.R. BUILDING, 135, GOLF LINKS,
NEW DELHI NEW DELHI 110 003
(PANAALCS9491H)
(APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT)
Department by : Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT(DR)
Assessee by : None
ORDER
PER H.S. SIDHU, JM
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the Order of the Ld.
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-8, New Delhi dated 12.2.2015
pertaining to assessment year 2010-11 on the following grounds:-
1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts that assessee
had itself admitted during the penalty proceedings that
there is violation of section 269SS.
2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts that in this case
there is a apparent cash transaction has been made by
1
assessee and in every manner the assessee failed to justify
the source of receiving / giving the amount.
3. The appellant craves to amend, modify, alter, add or forgo
any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the
hearing of this appeal.
2. The brief facts of the case are that assessment proceedings u/s.
143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was completed on 4.3.2013 at a loss
of Rs. 2,13,144/-. During the assessment proceedings, the AO observed
that assessee has accepted the loan amounting to Rs. 34,00,000/- from
Sh. Siddarath Bishnoi otherwise than by account payee chqeue or bank
draft. The AO considered the transactions in violation of provision of
section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961. During the assessment
proceedings, it was explained by the A.R. of the assessee to the AO that
ther was no involvement of cash , it was only journal entries passed in the
books of account in the assessee's company. However, the AO, after
considering the nature of transaction formed opinion that assessee
company has willfully taken the entries to hide the transaction and
accordingly, levied a penalty of Rs. 34,00,000/- u/s. 271D of the I.T. Act,
1961 vide order dated 27.8.2013. Aggrieved with the penalty order, the
assessee appealed before the Ld. Pr. CIT (OSD)(Appeals-8), New Delhi
who vide his impugned order 12.02.2015 has allowed the appeal of the
assessee by deleting the penalty in dispute.
2
3. Aggrieved with the impugned order, the Revenue is in appeal before
the Tribunal.
4. At the time of hearing, Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the
AO and reiterated the contentions raised by the Revenue in the grounds
of appeal.
5. In this case, Notice of hearing to the assessee was sent by the
Registered AD post, in spite of the same, assessee, nor its
authorized representative appeared to prosecute the matter in
dispute, nor filed any application for adjournment. Keeping in view
the facts and circumstances of the present case and the issue
involved in the present Appeal, we are of the view that no useful
purpose would be served to issue notice again and again to the
assessee, therefore, we are deciding the present appeal exparte
qua assessee, after hearing the Ld. DR and perusing the records.
6. We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the relevant records
available with us, especially the orders of the revenue authorities. We find
that in this case amount of loan was accepted by entry. However, there
was no receipt of money through cash or cheque or any other mode by
the assessee. Even the money was given on behalf of Sh. Kuldeep
Bishnoi was through account payee cheque, hence, the penalty is not
sustainable and was rightly deleted by the Ld. CIT(A), which does not
3
need any interference on our part, therefore, we uphold the action of the
Ld. Pr. CIT(A) and reject the grounds raised by the Revenue.
7. In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.
Order pronounced on 02/07/2018.
Sd / - Sd/-
[PRASHANT MAHARISHI] SIDHU]
[H.S. SIDHU]
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
Date 02/07/2018
"SRBHATNAGAR"
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant -
2. Respondent -
3. CIT
4. CIT (A)
5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY By Order,
Assistant Registrar,
ITAT, Delhi Benches
4
5
|
