9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 2241X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ern for squaring up connection, for ease of consolidation of accounts, rectification entries etc. Commissioner (Appeals) after referring the decision of Bombay High Court in Trump International [ 2012 (6) TMI 358 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] held that repayment of loan /deposit by way of journal entries was in contravention of provision of section 269SS has been given after the close of financial year 2011-12 relevant to assessment year 2012-13. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) concluded that reasons disclosed by assessee constitute reasonable cause within the meaning of section 273B of the Act; particularly in light of the fact that there is no finding that such transaction was undertaken to evade the tax. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hrough journal entries is not in doubt. (2) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) having held that assessee had contravened the provision of section 269SS of the Income tax Act 1961, ought to have upheld the levy of penalty under section 271D as the assessee failed to establish the compelling reason or genuine business constraint or reasonable cause for having connection in respect of each and every journal entry with its group concern. 3. The Cross objection raised by the assessee.:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have held that the order u/s 271D 271E of the Act was illegal and bad in law as it was passed beyond the period of limitation provided in clause (c of S. 275(1) of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceipt on sale of car parking Total 535 lacs Accordingly notices u/s 153C dated 27.09.2012 were issued and served upon the assessee requiring assessee to furnish returns of income for the various assessment years including A.Y. under consideration. In compliance of notice, the assessee furnished the return of income on 29.09.2011 declaring total income to the tune of ₹ 5,32,73,099/- after claiming the deduction under Chapter VIA of ₹ 59,19,233/-. The assessee accepted to repay the loan in contravention of provision 269SS/269T of the I.T. Act. The total entry was found to the tune of ₹ 5,03,15,487/-. After the completion of the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were made prior to 12 June 2012 as the present appeal pertains to assessment year 2012-13, therefore, the ratio of decision in case title as CIT Vs Trump International (I) Ltd dated 12 June 2012 (345 ITR 270)/ [22 Taxmann.com 138(Bom)] is not applicable. The ACIT levied the penalty under section 271D on the observation that the assessee accepted loan/ deposits from sister concern through journal entries i.e. otherwise then account payee cheque/draft and thereby violated the provisions of section 269SS. The assessee has taken journal entries of ₹ 10,99,595/-from Dharamnath Buildtech Farm Pvt Ltd. The assessing officer further held that the assessee has not made out any case of reasonable cause under section 273B by making the refer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to evade tax. The finding of the CIT(A) is based upon the decision of Bombay High Court in the assessee s sister concern case title as CIT Vs AjinathHitech builders Private Limited others in ITA s No. 171, 172, 202, 2.3, 218 and 219 of 2015 dated 06th February 2018. The ratio of other judgments relied by the assessee is also applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. The assessee relied upon the other judgments such as CIT versus Aasthavinayak Estate Company Ltd ( ITA No. 602/M/ 2017 dated 31 May 2018 and CIT Vs National Standard India Ltd ( ITA No. 6607/M/2016 and 6609/M/2016 dated 6th June 2018. Further, it also came into noticed that the case of the assessee pertains to the A.Y. of 2012-13, therefore, the ratio of de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
