TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee. - I.T.A.No.466/Vizag/2016 - - - Dated:- 21-2-2018 - SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For The Appellant : Shri P.S. Murthy, DR For The Respondent : Shri D.L. Narasimha Rao, AR ORDER PER D.S. SUNDER SINGH, Accountant Member: This appeal filed by the revenue is directed against order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) {CIT(A)}, Vijayawada vide ITA No.162/CIT(A)/VJA/2015-16 dated 25.8.2016 for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. All the grounds of appeal are related to the levy of penalty u/s 271D r.w.s. 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as 'the Act'). In this case, the Ld. Addl. CIT observed that the assessee has recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considered the submissions made by the assessee and relied on the order of Hon ble High Court of Jharkhand in the case of Bhalotia Engineering Works Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (275 ITR 399) and held that the share application money partakes the character of deposit, hence, the provisions of section 269SS of the Act are applicable, accordingly held that the assessee had contravened the provisions of section 269SS of the Act and imposed penalty of ₹ 50 lakhs u/s 271D of the Act. 5. Aggrieved by the order of the Addl.CIT the assessee went on appeal before the CIT(A) and the Ld. CIT(A) observed that in the assessee s case, the assessee has received the share application money and subsequently the shares were allotted, hence the assessee s case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hence, appellant's case is distinguishable on facts from that of the case mentioned by Addl. CIT in his penalty order viz. Bhalotia Engg. Works Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (275 ITR 399) (Jharkhand High court), as there was no occasion for refund of share application money to these directors in appellant's case. 5.2. Hon'ble Hyderabad Tribunal deleted the penalty imposed u/s.271D holding that the provisions of section 269SS are not applicable in the case of share application money, being not in the nature of loan or deposit in the case of ITO vs. Sunder Synthetics (P) Ltd. (Asst. Year 2008-09) - ITA No.314/Hyd/2015 order dated 01.07.2015 - (2015) 041 ITR (Trib.) 0618, (2015) Tax Pub (DT) 3229 (Hyd. Trib.). 5.3 In any event, sha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
