9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s in the books of the assessee would not amount to acceptance of any loan or deposit otherwise than account payee cheque or account payee bank draft within the meaning of section 269SS to attract levy of penalty u/s. 271D of the IT Act, 1961. 2.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, while deleting penalty, the ld. CIT(A) overlooked that the assessee along with others, was found to be indulging in large scale manipulation of prices of select scripts through fraudulent use of bank and other public funds and had flouted all the norms of risk management by making transactions through a large number of entities so as to hide the nexus between the source of funds and their ultimate use with the sole motive to evade tax. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Deparmtent u/s. 271D stood deleted by the ITAT. The A.R further placed reliance on High court judgement in the case of Noida Toll Bride Co. Ltd. (262 ITR 260)(Del) wherein it was held that provisions of section 269SS and 269T were not attracted in case of journal entries. Further reliance was placed on the judgement of Sunflower Builders (P) Ltd. 61 ITD 227 (Pn). Relying on the aforesaid judgment of the ITAT and High Court, the Assessee contended that penalty levied by the Additional Commissioner u/s. 271D deserved to be cancelled. 5.The CIT(A) noticed that the ITAT in the assessee s group had held that penalty cannot be levied when the payments were made through journal entries. The relevant portion of the para 7 of the ITAT ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as mentioned in Section 269 SS. Therefore, following these decisions of the Tribunal, we hold that no penalty can be levied where the payments are said to be made or received through journal entries. 6.As the facts existing in the present case were identical, following the aforesaid ITAT order, the penalty levied u/s. 271D was cancelled by CIT(A). Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the revenue has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal. 7.Before us the ld. D.R relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. We are of the view that in view of the decision of the ITAT referred to by the CIT(A), the penalty was rightly deleted by the CIT(A). Admittedly the transaction in question were made through journal entries and in suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
