TMI Blog2002 (7) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 14-2-1997 for assessment year 1995-96 wherein the learned CIT(A) has cancelled the penalty of Rs. 1,75,000 levied under section 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Short facts of the case are that during the course of processing of income-tax return under section 143(1)( a ) for assessment year 1995-96, the Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee firm has accepted deposits in cash from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he deposits from agriculturists who are illiterate persons and do not maintain any bank accounts. The assessee s transactions are bona fide and motivated by commercial consideration. Moreover the assessee was under bona fide belief that acceptance of cash deposits or loan within Rs. 20,000 would not attract the provisions of section 269SS. The Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the expla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cancelled the penalty. During the course of hearing our attention was drawn to the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Asstt. Director of Inspection (Investigation) v. Kum. A.B. Shanti [2002] 255 ITR 258 (SC) wherein it is held as under : "The object of introducing section 269SS is to ensure that a taxpayer is not allowed to give false explanation for his unaccounted money, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s case is merely technical and venial in nature and has not possibly resulted in loss to the Government revenue. Penalty will not be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. On a careful consideration of the entire facts we are of the view that the penalty has been rightly cancelled by the CIT(A). We see no infirmity in his order. 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. - - TaxTMI - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
