Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Manuals Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Binod Kumar Agarwal Versus J.C.I.T, Range-2, Jalpaiguri

2016 (2) TMI 927 - ITAT KOLKATA

Penalty u/s. 271D and 271E - advance receipt on sale of goods from dealers as deposit - Held that:- As find from the facts that the assessee has merely collected advances in cash from various dealers for supply of rice and wheat during the course of business. Hence, it can safely be concluded that the said receipts pertained the character of revenue receipts in the hands of the assessee. It is not in dispute that the said advances were duly adjusted by supply of goods by the assessee before the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the assessee arise out of the orders of the Learned CIT(A), Jalpaiguri in Appeal Nos. 26 & 27/JAL/CIT(A)/JAL/11-12 dated 06-11-2012 & 12- 11-2012 for the Asst Year 2008-09 against the separate orders of penalty levied by the Learned JCIT/ learned AO u/s. 271D & u/s 271E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) respectively. 2. The only issue to be decided in these two appeals of the assessee is as to whether the penalty u/s. 271D and 271E of the Act could b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to be adjusted against the supply of goods. The assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 10/12/2010 accepting the returned income. In the assessment no adverse comments were recorded by the ld.AO and not even any whisper was made with regard to advances received in cash by the assessee from various dealers and repayment made thereon in cash thereby violating the provisions of section 269SS and 269T of the Act. The ld.AO did not record any satisfaction in the assessment order with regar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

8,000/- each. This action of the ld. JCIT was upheld by the ld. CIT(A). Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before us on various grounds. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Though the assessee has raised several grounds in respect of aforesaid appeals, we find that the central ground revolves only on levy of penalty u/s. 271D and 271E of the Act. We find from the facts that the assessee has merely collected advances in cash from various dealers .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Recapitulation:

Recent / Latest:
Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 
 


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version