9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals)-47, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A) ] relevant to the assessment years 2006-07 2007-08. ITA. NO.4598/M/2015 2. The revenue has filed the present appeal against the order dated 05.05.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-47, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A) ] relevant to the assessment year 2006-07 in which the penalty levied by the AO has been ordered to be deleted. 3. The revenue has raised the following grounds: - 1'On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty U/S 271D of the Act without appreciating the fact that the assessee was not able to prove that the cash withdrawals made by her as director from the company were utilized for the purpose of business of the company and as such were in the nature of cash loans taken by the assessee from the company. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in deleting the penalty u/s 271D of the Act without appreciating the fact that the assessee has accepted cash loans exceeding ₹ 20,000/- in contravention of section 269SS of the Act and as such is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 31,67,000/- u/s 271D of the Act was levied. Thereafter, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who deleted the penalty, therefore, the revenue has filed the present appeal before us. 6. We have heard the argument and advanced by the Ld. Representative of the parties and perused the record. Before going further, we deemed it necessary to advert the finding of the CIT(A) on record.: - 6.1 1 have carefully considered the penalty order and the appellant's written submission. The written submission dated 22.04.2015 is quoted below for ready reference: 1) Aggrieved with the addition on the above ground, the Appellant had filed an appeal before CIT (A) - 47 i.e. before your honour and after considering all the facts and circumstances of the facts; your honour had deleted the additions made on this ground based on the following contention: a) The Appellant states that these are bank transactions reflected in the hank statements of M/s. Matrix. The copies of hank statements of Matrix reflecting above transactions in its books of accounts are also enclosed. The Appellant states that she has nothing to lo wit/i the bank withdrawals of M/s. Matrix except tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 21.03.2006 1,000,000 - - - 17 21.03.2006 500,000 - - - 18 22.03.2006 300,000, Total 2,755,000 Total 2,695,000 From the above table, it is can be observed that in many instances, the cash withdrawn and re-deposited matches. The copies of cash book bank statements of the company M/s. Matrix highlighting the above cash withdrawn and re-deposited are enclosed herewith for your kind perusal. (1) The Appellant in the capacity of director of the company Matrix states that at times, the company had to withdraw certain cash amount for the purpose of making payments to the workers also making sets for shooting for which the payments are required to be made on sites. The job workers on sites are basically workers who do not maintain Bank Accounts to whom cheque payments can he made. The nature of the business of the business of the Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eck forcefully as if she has taken loan from the company which is far from the truth. Since no payment was made to the Appellant by the company as a Loan or Advance, the provisions of section 2 (22)(e) of the Act does not attract. Based on the above Appellant's contention, your honour has stated vide Para 9.3 at Page no. 8 of the CIT (A) Order dated 30.03.2015 for the AY 2006-07 as below: The Affidavit submitted by Matrix Company is kept on record. I have carefully perused the Appellant's written submission especially at par- (a), (b), (c), (d) (g). It is seen that the correct cash withdrawal is ₹ 27,55,000/- and not ₹ 31,67,000/- as money the AO. The said amount has also been re-deposited as evidenced by the bank statements. There is no transfer of money from Company's account to the Appellant's account and so there is no loan or advance given by the company to the Appellant. Thus, the addition is deleted. Ground of Appeal No. 2 is allowed. 3) The appellant states that the addition made on account of Deemed Dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act has been deleted by your honour as exhibited above and as a result, the Appellant prays to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
