9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee would not have shown it as loan in its books of account and financial statement. As far as the contention of the assessee that the transaction is bona fide and there is no accounted money, hence, provisions of section 263SS is not applicable, we are unable to accept such contention of the assessee. On reading of the provisions of section 269SS of the Act, it is very clear that it is applicable to a situation where cash loan is accepted in excess of the prescribed limit. Therefore, there is nothing in the said provision to show that it will apply only in a case where unaccounted cash is introduced or transaction is not bona fide. Therefore, in the facts of the present case, since it is proved that the assessee has received cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rty for the management of which he had appointed the assessee attorney before his death on 17th December 2000. It was submitted after her husband s death, Ms. Edna Misquitta, also executed a power of attorney on 14th August 2001 in favour of the assessee for managing the property inherited by her. It was submitted that as a result of such power of attorney the relationship between the assessee with M/s. Edna Misquitta is that of a trust and trustee and not of a lender and borrower. It was submitted, the lady had advanced money to the assessee from time to time which as on 31st March 2007, aggregated to ₹ 1.06 crores which also included the amount of ₹ 2.50 lakh given in cash. It was submitted though the amount of ₹ 2.50 la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... demonstrate that the amount received was for the purpose of purchase of any property whereas the Balance Sheet and books of account of the assessee show the amount of ₹ 2.50 lakhs as loan. Therefore, opining that provision of section 269SS was violated by the assessee in accepting the cash loan, he sustained the imposition of penalty under section 271D of the Act. 4. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted before us that purpose of introducing of section 269SS is to curb introduction of unaccounted money. In case of assessee, since the transaction is genuine and no unaccounted cash was introduced, the provisions of section 269SS of the Act are not applicable. In this context, he relied upon the following decisions: i) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ower of attorney executed by Ms. Edna Misquitta, has no relationship with the cash loan as it was executed in the year 2001. Therefore, the assessee cannot take a plea that the amount of ₹ 2.50 lakh was received in terms with the power of attorney for incurring expenditure on behalf of the assessee. He, therefore, submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, imposition of penalty is justified. 6. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record. We have also examined the case laws relied upon by the learned counsel for the assessee. Undisputedly, it is a fact on record that the assessee in its Balance Sheet has shown the amount of ₹ 2.50 lakh as loan received in cash ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oduced or transaction is not bona fide. Therefore, in the facts of the present case, since it is proved that the assessee has received cash loan of ₹ 2.50 lakh in violation of provisions contained in section 269SS, imposition of penalty, in our view, is justified. As far as the decisions relied upon by the learned Counsel for the assessee are concerned, suffice to say, there is no dispute or doubt with regard to the principle laid down, therein, but, they are in the context of specific facts involved in those cases and will not apply to each and every case irrespective of difference in facts. Therefore, the decision relied upon do not, in any manner, help assessee s case. Accordingly, we uphold the order of the learned Commissioner (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
