TMI Blog2007 (12) TMI 320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... P. Tolani, Judicial Member - This is assessee s appeal against order of CIT(A) dated 19-7-2007. Grounds raised are as under. 2. Ground No. 6 is not pressed. In remaining grounds raised only one issue i.e. challenging levy of penalty under section 271D of Rs. 5 lakhs (remains) for adjudication. 3. Brief facts are during the course of assessment proceedings, it was found that assessee had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer, however, levied penalty which was challenged in first appeal, where it was confirmed. 4. Aggrieved assessee is in second appeal. Learned counsel for the assessee reiterated contentions and further contends that the deposit was received from director in peculiar circumstances. Assessee is a finance company and has to ensure that its cheques are honoured. In the instant case, cheque of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal in the case of Shreenath Builders v. Dy. CIT [2000] 111 Taxman 142 (Mag.) holding as under : "A harmonious construction of the relevant provisions of ss. 271D, 271E and 273B clearly reveals that the use of the expression shall be liable to pay in ss. 271D and 271E and the provisions of section 273B providing that no penalty would be leviable if the person concerned proves that there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spute that Shri Gital S. Patel is director of the assessee company, amount was raised by him from his bank account in Srinathji Co-op. Bank and cheque issued by the assessee for Rs. 10 lakhs was cleared on the same date. What remains to be seen is whether it constitutes a reasonable cause or not. In my considered opinion, assessee being a finance company, it is in the paramount interest of the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
