9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1363X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hore [2013 (3) TMI 222 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT ] has held that the six month period for the purpose of clause (c) of section 275(1) of the Act is to be computed from the date of issue of first show cause notice by the AO and not from the date of issue of first show cause notice issued by the Joint Commissioner. In the light of the above decision, the order dated 08.06.2011 is hit by the bar of limitation as prescribed in clause(c) of section 275(1) of the Act and the same is accordingly set aside. - Decided in favour of assessee Penalty u/s 271D - ₹ 40,000/- i.e. the amount equal to the amount of cash loan accepted by the assessee - Held that:- The assessee has explained that the assessee lady has been engaged in the profession of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2008-09 2. The assessee in this appeal has taken an additional ground that the penalty order is barred by limitation. At the outset, the Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the penalty order dated 08.06.2011 of the Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) is barred by limitation as provided under section 275(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act. The relevant part of the section 275(1), for the sake of convenience is reproduced as under: Bar of limitation for imposing penalties. 275 (1) No order imposing a penalty under this Chapter shall be passed- (a) in a case where the relevant assessment or other order is the subjectmatter of an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d of the month in which the action for initiation of penalty proceedings expires on 30.05. 2011. The Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT vs. Jitendra Singh rathore [2013] 352 ITR 327 has held that the six month period for the purpose of clause (c) of section 275(1) of the Act is to be computed from the date of issue of first show cause notice by the AO and not from the date of issue of first show cause notice issued by the Joint Commissioner. In the light of the above decision, the order dated 08.06.2011 is hit by the bar of limitation as prescribed in clause(c) of section 275(1) of the Act and the same is accordingly set aside. This appeal of the assessee is, therefore, allowed. ITA No.1080/M/2013 for A.Y. 2007-08 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e lady has been engaged in the profession of tailoring. She had no intention to contravene the provisions of the Act. In fact, after receipt of loan from her daughter in law, a very close relative, she had deposited the amount in bank. Both the ladies were unaware of the provisions of law in this respect. Considering the status of the assessee being a small time tailor, her gross total Income mainly from tailoring and interest income for A.Y. 2008-09 only ₹ 158282/- , the total income in relation to which was returned and assessed at ₹ 150280/- and there being no intention to breach the provisions of law while accepting loan of ₹ 40,000/- from her daughter in law, we do not find it a fit case for levy of penalty u/s 271D o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
