TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 911X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT (Appeals) V, Hyderabad, dated 14-9-2007, and pertains to asst. year 2003-04. 2. Shri Murali Mohan Rao, learned representative for the assessee, submitted that the assessee is engaged in the business of development and export of software. According to the learned representative, the assessee had taken a loan in cash from four persons due to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee was forced to receive cash. Therefore, there cannot be levy of penalty under sec. 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 3. On the contrary, Shri E.S.Nagendra Prasad, learned departmental representative, submitted that the assessee had taken cash loan of ₹ 2,00,000 from two individuals on 5-3-2003. The assessee clarified before the lower authorities that salary was paid in the first ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t week of every month and, therefore, the assessee would have made some arrangement to get the money through banking channels. However, the fact remains that the assessee received ₹ 2,00,000 from two individuals and deposited the same on the very same day with ICICI Bank and paid the salary on that day itself. Payment of salary is one of the important functions of a business organization as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew of the provisions of sec. 273B of the Income-tax Act, there cannot be levy of penalty under sec. 271D. In view of the above discussion, we are unable to uphold the order of the lower authorities. Accordingly, the same is set aside and the entire penalty is deleted. 5. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 20-11-09. - - TaxTMI - TMIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
