9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1565X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appeals urges the following reframed questions of law for our consideration : (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in upholding penalty imposed under Section 271D without appreciating that the transactions were genuine, bona fide and carried out without having any intention to evade tax and the infraction of provisions of Section 269SS was not with knowledge or in defiance of this section with contumacious or dishonest intent? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was correct in coming to the conclusion that there was an absence of reasonable cause within the meaning of section 273B? 3. During the course of search and seizu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chaudhari and Baijabai P. Deore were agriculturists and whether or not banking facilities existed in their villages for the purposes of considering reasonable cause for accepting loans in cash. Besides, penalty imposed in respect of Rs. 1.75 lakhs obtained from Mr. R.B. Suryawanshi in cash was also restored to the Assessing Officer to reexamine the issue as the contention of the assessee was that the loan amount was only Rs. 1 lakh and, therefore, the penalty could not be in excess thereof. Thus, wherever the reasonable cause was shown, the impugned order of the Tribunal has deleted the penalty or where reasonable cause was likely the issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. In cases where no reasonable cause was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion in setting aside the imposition of penalty or restoring it to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration in the light of the facts pointed out by the appellant during the course of the hearing. Wherever no reasonable cause was pointed out, the impugned order of the Tribunal did not disturb the findings arrived at by the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). Thus, this is not a case of non exercise of discretion under Section 273B of the Act as alleged by the appellant. From the reading of the impugned order of the Tribunal, we find that in respect of the loans on which penalty has been confirmed, the appellant assessee has not made out and / or submitted any reasonable cause for the Tribunal to exercise its discretion to set aside the pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
