TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/2005 - - - Dated:- 24-5-2018 - Sanjiv Khanna And Chander Shekhar, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing Counsel for Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel For the Respondent : Mr. Prakash Kumar, Advocate ORDER Sanjiv Khanna, J. ( Oral ) This appeal preferred by the Revenue impugns order dated 3rd September, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short the Tribunal‟) in ITA No. 903/Del/2003 in the case of Pawan Kumar Jain versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. The appeal relates to Assessment Year 1999-2000. 2. By the impugned order, the Tribunal has deleted penalty of ₹ 21,47,019/- imposed by the Assessing Officer under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me goes against the claim of the assessee that it was merely an imprest money with him. 5. The aforesaid findings were upheld and sustained by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for short CIT(A)], who had elucidated: ....Therefore, the AO has rightly initiated and levied the penalty u/s 271D of the Act. The appellant submits that he received the amount for the purchase of old manuscripts. There is no evidence produced to show that any resolution was passed by the Sadan before transferring the money to the imprest account that it was for the purpose of purchase of old manuscripts. Secondly, even if it is accepted that it was meant for the purchase of old manuscripts, it is all the more justified to levy penalty because the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. This receipt by the assessee was in cash and was beyond the limits laid down u/s 269 SS of the Act and therefore penalty proceedings were initiated and also levied. The plea of the assessee was that this money was kept as imprest with the assessee and was to be utilized for the purpose of purchase of old manuscripts. The fact that this sum was shown in the assessee's books of accounts is also not in dispute. A copy of the said account as appearing in the books of accounts of the assessee is placed at page no. 62 of assessee's paper book. The account is titled imprest account (Jain Sahitya Sadan), the description found therein also shows the receipts as for purchase of old manuscripts. As on 3/4/98 and (sic) amount of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (SS) of the Act. There is a reference in the order imposing penalty that the utilization of funds by the assessee is contrary to the purpose for which the money was lying with him. In other words it was submitted that the assessee has unjustly enriched himself. We are not concerned in the present case as to whether the assessee is guilty of any misappropriation of funds of Jain Sahitya Sadan. The question before us is as to whether the assessee had taken loan in cash from Jain Sahitya Sadan. These arguments put forth before us are therefore considered as superfluous. In conclusion were (sic) hold that there was no loan availed by the assessee in cash from Jain Sahitya Sadan. The imposition of penalty on the assumption that the assessee had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8377; 14,97,019/- received in cash on 26th June, 1998 was utilized for acquiring 14 FDRs of ₹ 90,000/- each and one FDR of ₹ 87,000/- total amounting to ₹ 13,47,000/- on the same day. 8. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee submits that the matter may be remanded to the Tribunal for fresh adjudication without making and expressing firm comments. He submits that the assessee had raised a number of other points which have not been considered by the Tribunal. Our attention is drawn to the arguments as recorded in the order of CIT(A). 9. We take the statement made by the counsel for the respondent/ assessee on record and accordingly set aside the impugned order dated 3rd September, 2004 with an orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
