Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (2) TMI 218 - ITAT RAIPURPenalty u/s. 271D - sustainability of the penalty imposed u/s. 271D in absence of any satisfaction for initiating the said penalty proceedings by the A.O in the body of the assessment order - allegation of violating the provision of sec.269SS by accepting cash deposit for more than Rs.20,000/- from the parties - whether or not penalty imposed by the JCIT u/s. 271D de-hors recording of satisfaction by the A.O for initiating the said penalty proceedings in the body of the assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) is sustainable in the eyes of law? - HELD THAT:- A.O in the fresh assessment order had not recorded his satisfaction regarding penalty u/s. 271D of the Act, therefore, de-hors recording of requisite satisfaction the penalty imposed u/s. 271D of the Act could not be sustained and was liable to be quashed. See Jai Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City [2015 (11) TMI 1453 - SUPREME COURT] A similar view had been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Parivar Television, Tax [2023 (10) TMI 707 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], wherein the Hon’ble High Court had approved the view taken by the Tribunal and observed that as no satisfaction regarding initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271E of the Act was recorded in the assessment order, therefore, no penalty under the said statutory provision could be levied. Considering the fact that the issue before us is no more resintegra in light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills Ambala City (supra), therefore, in the backdrop of our aforesaid deliberations, the penalty imposed by the Jt.CIT u/s. 271D of the Act cannot be sustained and is liable to be struck down for want of valid assumption of jurisdiction. Appeal of assessee allowed.
|