TMI Blog1999 (2) TMI 106X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the reply filed by assessee, the AO was of the view that assessee has committed a default by violating the provisions of s. 269SS. Therefore, he was liable for penalty under s. 271D. It was further observed by the AO that at the time of assessment the assessee has submitted that the interest was paid on borrowed funds. Now the assessee has changed his view by mentioning that a tractor was purchased in joint venture. Therefore, the cash amount was received from these three respective parties. The AO was of the view that this is a change in opinion and assessee has clearly violated the provisions. Accordingly penalty of Rs. 1,38,000 was levied. The CIT(A) confirmed the action of the AO. 2. Now the assessee is in appeal here before us. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... received and accepted the deposit in cash. It is also established that they were received for the business purpose and not for the purpose of joint venture because there is not a single evidence in support of the contention of the assessee. All the evidence and circumstances clearly established that the loans were accepted by the assessee in cash. Three loans were accepted which were in violation of provisions of s. 269SS i.e. Rs. 48,000 from Shri Narain Pd. Suthar which was received on 20th June, 1992, Rs. 50,000 from Smt. Asha Devi on 20th June, 1992 and Rs. 40,000 from Shri Jethmal Suthar on 25th May, 1992. We further noted that no confirmation of any kind was filed from these persons neither they were produced before the AO in spite of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the penalty will be justified in refusing to impose penalty, when there is a technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act or where the breach flows from a bona fide belief that the offender is not liable to act in the manner prescribed by the statute." In the present case also we find that at least in two deposits i.e., from Narain Prasad Suthar and Smt. Asha Devi are concerned, there was a default of technical nature only because on this day the assessee was in urgent need of the money and being Saturday the depositor could not make the draft for meeting out the urgent need of the assessee. Therefore, they gave these amounts in cash to the assessee. However, we are not impressed by the third depositor because that was accepted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
