2017 (5) TMI 1669

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... A.T.Varkey,   This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-6, Kolkata dated 29.01.2015 for AY 2009-10. 2. The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) upholding the decision of the JCIT, Range-2, Kolkata in imposing penalty of Rs. 7.80 lacs u/s. 271D read with section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the " .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y, the money has come from the parents of the assessee. Therefore, the ratio laid down in the case of G. D. Subraya Sheregar v. I. T.O. (2006) 10 378 by the Bangalore Bench of this Tribunal is squarely applicable to the facts of this case, wherein contravention of provision of S. 269-SS was held to be not applicable in a transaction between a father 'and son. We further find that the fact that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ibutable to ignorance of statutory provisions of the act. The assessee's case finds support from the decision of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of Farrukhabad Investment (I) Ltd. V. JCIT (2003) 85 ITR 230 (Del) where the professional auditors, experts in the field of taxation, did not point out any violation of S. 269 SS of the Act, it was held that it would be too much to expect from the assessee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X