9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1052X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appreciated the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II, Lucknow is not correct in considering the age of Smt. Sharda Agarwal as 80 whereas as per the permanent account number details (AAQPA1701J), she was below 60 in the relevant financial year. The assessee has succeeded in creating the situation of cash loan repayment as reasonable by wrongly quoting the age of her mother Smt. Sharda Agarwal. 3. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-II, Lucknow has not correctly appreciated the fact that Smt. Meenu Agarwal legal heir of Late Shri Ram Ratan Agarwal returned the loan of Rs. 6,93,450 cash to her mother, Smt. Sharda Agarwal for repaying her loan taken during the cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alty order is barred by time and deserves to be quashed. 3. On merit, learned counsel for the assessee has argued that the transaction was undertaken within the family members. The assessee has received cheque from his mother which was repaid partly by cheque and partly in cash ; therefore, there is no violation of the provisions of section 269T of the Act for which penalty is leviable. 4. The learned Departmental representative, on the other hand, has placed reliance upon the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. Having carefully examined the orders of the lower authorities in the light of the rival submissions, we find that undisputedly the assessment was completed on December 24, 2010 and reference to the Additional Commissioner of Incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 21, 2010 and if the period of six months is counted from October 31, 2010, the same expires on June 30, 2011 and the penalty order has been passed on July 28, 2011 and hence, the penalty order is time barred as per the provisions of section 275 of the Act. We hold accordingly and the penalty order is quashed being time barred."
6. Following the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, we are of the view that the penalty order is barred by time and we accordingly confirm the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cancelling the penalty.
7. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.
8. The order was pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the captioned page. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
