9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1788X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appeal filed by the revenue thereagainst. Thus, the transaction in violation of section 269SS was found to be genuine. Therefore, the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of OMEC Engineers [ 2007 (9) TMI 27 - HIGH COURT , JHARKHAND ] clearly applies to the facts of the case. Respectfully following the same, I delete the levy of penalty and allow ground of appeal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 15.12.2008 admitted the fact that ₹ 5 lakh was received in cash from Shri Sadhu Charan Mahato and no further explanation has been offered in the penalty proceedings u/s.271D of the Act. He, therefore, levied penalty of ₹ 5 lakhs u/s.271D of the Act for violating section 269SS by accepting the loan of ₹ 5 lakhs in cash. 4. Before me, it was submitted that in the qua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of OMEC Engineers (supra) has held as under: The moot question that falls for consideration is that as to whether the assessee shall be to imposition of penalty, notwithstanding the finding recorded by the authority that the transaction made in violation of s. 269SS was a genuine transaction and the return was finally accepted under s. 143(3) and further that no loss of reven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esulted in any loss of revenue, shall be harsh and cannot be sustained in law. There being no finding of AO, CIT(A) or Tribunal that the transactions in violation of Se.269SS were not genuine, assessee s return having been accepted under section 143(3) after scrutiny there being also no finding that transactions were malafide aimed at disclosing concealed money, imposition of penalty under section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
