9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 876X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee arising out of order of Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-9/DCIT-5(2)/94/2013- 14 dated 04.11.2013. The assessment was framed by the ACIT, Circle 5(2), Mumbai for the assessment year 2005-2006 vide his order dated 12.12.2007 u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act"). The penalty under dispute was levied by the Addl.CIT, Range 5(2), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed reply stating that during assessment year 2004-2005, the assesseecompany has advanced a sum of Rs. 15 lakh to Shri R.Bhaskaran towards business deal. In support of which the ledger account copy of Shri R.Bhaskaran in the books of the assessee-company for assessment year 2004-2005 was filed. The assessee also filed copy of audited balance sheet for assessment year 2004-2005 evidencing therein ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d back by account payee cheque / draft by Shri Om Prakash Kanungo from Shri R.Bhaskaran, on behalf of the company, but Shri Om Prakash Kanungo passed a journal entry in the books of assessee-company, the same is to be treated as repayment of cash loan and accordingly, the Addl.CIT levied penalty u/s 271E of the Act for violation of the provisions of section 269T of the Act for repayment of cash lo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ors of the assessee-company, Shri Om Prakash Kanungo by Shri R.Bhaskaran. We find that there is a reasonable cause rather the payment is through account payee cheque. In our view, there is no violation of provisions of section 269T and consequential penalty u/s 271E is without any basis. We delete the penalty and allow the appeal of the assessee. 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
