TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 603X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent Year 200910 i.e. Financial Year 200809. At that time, the decisions of the Tribunal in the cases of Triumph International (2012 (6) TMI 358 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT). wherein held that deposits / loans received through journal entries do not fall with the mischief of Section 269SS, were holding the field. Thus, not in breach of Section 269SS of the Act While agreeing with the submission of Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the appellant that the decision of this Court in Triumph International Finance (supra) has only clarified / stated the position as always existing in law, the receiving of deposits / loans through journal entries would certainly be hit by Section 269SS of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee - Income Tax Appeal No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment order instead of the date of issue of penalty notice by the Addl. CIT ? (iv) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal is justified in holding that the journal entries should enjoy equal immunity on par with account payee cheques and bank drafts ? 3. Regarding Question No.(i) : (a) The common impugned order of the Tribunal arises from the orders passed by the Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax imposing penalty upon the respondents under Section 271D of the Act for breach of Section 269SS of the Act. This penalty was imposed inasmuch as during the previous year relevant to the subject assessment year, the respondents had accepted loans / deposits by way of passing journal entries in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sonable cause on the part of the respondents. This finding of reasonable cause was on the application of parameters laid down by this Court in Triumph International Finance (supra) to determine reasonable cause for not complying with the provisions of Section 269SS of the Act. (c) Mr. Mohanty, the learned Counsel for the Revenue seeks to challenge the impugned order of the Tribunal on the ground that Section 273B of the Act will have no application as the test of reasonable cause is not satisfied :in the present facts for the following reasons : (i) the decision of this Court in Triumph International Finance (supra) will have no application as that was of the case of only one transaction while in this case, there are numerous transac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal records that as observed by this Court in Triumph International Finance (supra) that journal entries constituted a recognized modes of recording of transactions and in the absence of any adverse finding by the authorities that the journal entries were made with a view to achieve purposes out side the normal business operations or there was any involvement of money, then, in these facts there was a reasonable cause for not complying with Section 269SS of the Act. (e) Mr. Mohanty's submission that the test laid down in Triumph International Finance (supra) will have no application in the present facts in view of the large number of entries in this case as compared to only one entry in the case before this Court. The test of r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Commissioner of Income Tax, 31 ITR 28 had laid down the tests to determine a question of law and / or fact. In the above context, the Court observed that when the finding is one of fact, the fact that it itself is an inference from other basic facts, will not alter its character as one of fact. Therefore, the issue of there being reasonable cause or not, is a question of fact and unless it is shown to be perverse, we would normally not interfere. (g) In the above circumstances, the view taken by the Tribunal on the facts before it, is a possible view and does not give rise to any substantial question of law. (h) In any event, as rightly pointed out by Mr. Sridharan, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents assesses, the order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessment Year 200910 i.e. Financial Year 200809. At that time, the decisions of the Tribunal in the cases of Triumph International (Supra) and decision of V.H. Parekh (P) Ltd., Ketan V. Parekh, Sunflower Builders (supra), Ruchika Chemicals (supra), Lala Murari Lal (supra) and the decision of the Delhi High Court in Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd. (supra) were holding the field. Thus, not in breach of Section 269SS of the Act. In the above view, while agreeing with the submission of Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the appellant that the decision of this Court in Triumph International Finance (supra) has only clarified / stated the position as always existing in law, the receiving of deposits / loans through journal entries would certainly be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
