2025 (2) TMI 87

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the said loan to the assessee in the dire need as mentioned above. We are of the firm opinion that there are reasonable causes for not levying penalties u/s 271D and 271E r.w.s. 274 of the Act. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned orders and quash the penalties levied by the JCIT, Range Panipat. Decided in favour of assessee.
Shri Yogesh Kumar Us, Judicial Member And Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Sh. Rakesh Jain, Advocate For the Respondent : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR ORDER PER AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA, AM Since the facts of these cases relevant for deciding these appeals are common; therefore, these cases were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. 2. The appeal ITA N .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wed Rs. 17,00,000/- from following persons: Mr. Amit Kaushik Rs.4,00,000/- Mr. Naveen Kaushik Rs. 3,50,000/- Mr. Satbir Kaushik Rs.2,40,000/- Mr. Jagdish Rs.4,00,000/- Mr. Ramphal Rs.3,10,000/- Total Rs.17,00,000/- 3.1 The CBI team came again on 07.09.2013. She handed over the cash of Rs. 17,00,000/- to the CBI on 07.09.2013. The above mentioned five persons have been stated to be agriculturists. The cases of these five persons were also stated having scrutinized and additions were made in three cases only; namely, Mr. Amit Kaushik, Mr. Jagdish and Mr. Ramphal. However, these persons got relief from the ITAT. It was also stated that the Assessing Officer (hereinafter, the 'AO') of Mr. Naveen Kaushik and Mr. Satbir Kaushik did n .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... money to her were agriculturist and that was why they had given cash loans, in anonymity, in the fear of CBI actions on them also. iv) After the ITAT order as mentioned above, the said loans advanced by those persons treated as unexplained, were found genuine. v) Out of loans of Rs. 17,00,000/-, she had returned only the loan of Rs. 3,50,000/- to Shri Naveen Kaushik on his insistence. 4.1 The Ld. AR also placed reliance on various judicial pronouncements as mentioned in the penalty orders. 5. On the contrary, the Ld. Sr. DR, highlighting the facts mentioned in the penalty orders and appeal orders, argued vehemently and prayed for dismissal of these appeals. 6. We have heard both the parties and have perused the material available on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X