TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 965X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to challenge the order of the Tribunal dt. 26th April, 2002. The appeal was admitted on 14th Nov., 2002, by framing following substantial questions of law : (1)Whether under the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in reversing the order of CIT(A) and holding that the penalty under s. 271D amounting to ₹ 1,65,000 was correctly imposed by the AO ? (2)Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earned AO considered the explanation of the assessee about the reasonable cause, as contemplated by s. 273B, and found that the explanation is not believable. The explanation given was about the assessee's mother having become ill, who was required to be taken to Bombay and in receiving the amount by cheque, it would have involved some time, which he would not wait for. 4. In appeal, the le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss of the mother is produced, and since no mens rea is involved. It was also found that it will be too harsh to levy penalty in such circumstance, and set aside the penalty. 5. The Revenue went in further appeal before the Tribunal, and the learned Tribunal, disagreeing with the finding of the learned CIT(A) held, that the breach involved is not mere a technical one but a clear and full-fledged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ill but no details of her illness nor any supportive evidence regarding her illness and for her treatment at Bombay has been furnished, and in turn the related urgency remains as having not been established. It was also found that this is also the undisputed position that the assessee never took his mother to Bombay for treatment and the explanation is that she was not taken to Bombay under medic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent case, the facts found are glaring, which on the face of it clearly negative the existence of any reasonable cause. 7. That being the position, question No. 1 is required to be answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue, then regarding question Nos. 2 and 3, it cannot be said to be any more res integra, in view of the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
