Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (5) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2021 (5) TMI 341 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the levy of penalty under sections 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Whether journal entries for creation/assignment of debt and liabilities constitute a violation of sections 269SS and 269T of the Act.
3. Consideration of reasonable cause under section 273B for non-compliance with sections 269SS and 269T.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of the Levy of Penalty under Sections 271D and 271E:
The primary issue in the appeals was whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] was justified in deleting the penalties levied under sections 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act. The penalties were imposed by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax for alleged violations of sections 269SS and 269T due to certain journal entries passed by the assessee.

2. Journal Entries and Violation of Sections 269SS and 269T:
The assessee, engaged in real estate construction and development, had passed journal entries for the creation/assignment of debt and liabilities. The Assessing Officer (AO) considered these as loan transactions settled otherwise than by cheque, thus violating sections 269SS and 269T. The CIT(A) observed that the transactions were genuine and conducted in the ordinary course of business, and held that the penalties were not justified as the assessee had shown reasonable cause under section 273B.

3. Reasonable Cause under Section 273B:
The Tribunal examined whether the assessee had reasonable cause for the transactions made through journal entries. It was noted that prior to the decision of the Bombay High Court in Triumph International Finance (India) Limited on 12.06.2012, there were consistent judicial decisions holding that journal entries did not violate sections 269SS and 269T. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee had a bona fide belief based on these precedents, constituting a reasonable cause under section 273B.

Journal Entries Before and After 12.06.2012:
The Tribunal differentiated between journal entries passed before and after 12.06.2012. For entries before this date, the Tribunal held that the assessee had reasonable cause due to the prevailing judicial interpretations. For entries after 12.06.2012, the Tribunal examined the specific transactions and found them to be genuine business transactions without any intent to evade tax.

Detailed Transactions Analysis:
- Penalty under Section 271D: The Tribunal found that the journal entries passed on 02.05.2012 for a transaction amounting to ?99,60,29,234 were genuine and conducted in the ordinary course of business. The penalty was deleted as the transaction occurred before the critical date of 12.06.2012.
- Penalty under Section 271E: Similar findings were made for journal entries passed on or before 12.06.2012, amounting to ?99,50,34,184. The Tribunal held that the penalties were not justified due to the reasonable cause shown by the assessee.

Transactions After 12.06.2012:
The Tribunal scrutinized transactions involving Brand Equity Treaties Limited (BETL) and found them to be genuine business transactions. The entries were passed to adjust amounts payable for advertisement expenses against receivables from BETL for the sale of flats. The Tribunal concluded that these transactions did not constitute loans or deposits and were made for business exigencies and administrative convenience, thus constituting reasonable cause under section 273B.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalties under sections 271D and 271E, finding that the assessee had reasonable cause for the journal entries made. The appeals by the revenue were dismissed, and the Tribunal emphasized that the transactions were genuine and conducted in the ordinary course of business without any intent to evade tax. The Tribunal's decision was based on a thorough analysis of the facts and prevailing judicial precedents.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates