9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (12) TMI 542X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t when there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden duty of an adjudicating authority, be in an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court - Penalty deleted - Decided in favour of assessee. - Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri S. Phanindra, AR For the Revenue : Shri Waseem UR Rehman, DR ORDER Aggrieved by the order dated 26/09/2023 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)- National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi ( Ld. CIT(A) ), in the case of Homoeopath Toufeeq Ahmed ( the assessee ) for the assessment year 2017-18, assessee preferred this appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that during the financial year relevant to assessment year 2017-18, assessee sold a house bearing Municipal No. 16-9-433/1, admeasuring 407.7 Sq. Yards or equivalent to 340.91 Sq. Meters, situated at old Malakpet, near Race Course, Hyderabad for an amount of Rs. 41,53,000/- and accepted Rs. 41,53,000/- in cash in contravention to the provision of section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ), learned Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Srinivasa Reddy Reddeppagari (supra). In that case, while referring to the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (supra), the Hon ble High Court held that the provisions under section 271E and 271D of the Act are in pari materia and since in terms of the decision in Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (supra), satisfaction must be recorded in the original assessment order for the purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271E of the Act, the same is equally applicable for initiation of penalty proceedings under section 271D of the Act. Hon ble High Court further observed that when there is a decision of the Supreme Court, it is the bounden duty of an adjudicating authority, be in an income tax authority or any other civil authority or for that matter any court in the country, to comply with the decision of the Supreme Court. For the sake of completeness, I deem it just and necessary to extract hereunder the relevant observations and findings of the Hon'ble High Court,- 14. Issue raised in the writ petition is whether without satisfaction being recorded in the assessment order, penalty can be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es or accepts any loan or deposit or specified amount in contravention of the provisions of Section 269SS, he shall be liable to pay by way of penalty, a sum equal to the amount of the loan or deposit or specified sum so taken or accepted. Sub-section (2) clarifies that any penalty imposable under sub-section (1) shall be imposed by the Joint Commissioner. 20. It would be useful to refer to Section 271E of the Act also at this stage which deals with penalty for failure to comply with the provisions of Section 269T of the Act. Be it stated that Section 269T of the Act provides that no branch of a banking company or a cooperative bank and no other company or cooperative society and no firm or other person shall repay any loan or deposit made with it or any specified advance received by it otherwise than by an account payee cheque or account payee bank draft drawn in the name of the person who had made the loan or deposit or who had paid the specified advance or by use of electronic clearing system through a bank account or through such other electronic mode as may be prescribed, if such an amount is twenty thousand rupees or more. As in the case of Section 269SS, Section 269T of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld as follows: The Tribunal as well as the High Court has held that it could not be so for the simple reason that when the original assessment order itself was set aside, the satisfaction recorded therein for the purpose of initiation of the penalty proceeding under Section 271E would also not survive. This according to us is the correct proposition of law stated by the High Court in the impugned order. As pointed out above, insofar as, fresh assessment order is concerned, there was no satisfaction recorded regarding penalty proceeding under Section 271E of the Act, though in that order the Assessing Officer wanted penalty proceeding to be initiated under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thus, insofar as penalty under Section 271E is concerned, it was without any satisfaction and, therefore, no such penalty could be levied. These appeals are, accordingly, dismissed. 24. Reverting back to the facts of the present case, we find that petitioner had submitted reply to the show cause notice on 02.06.2022. In his reply, petitioner mentioned that no satisfaction was recorded by the assessing officer in the assessment order as to infraction of Section 269SS of the Act. Therefore, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
