TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penalty u/s 271D of the Act. The assessee had placed reliance on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Smt. M. Yasoda [ 2013 (2) TMI 211 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] wherein the loan received by that assessee from her father-in-law was subjected to levy of penalty under section 271D of the Act and the Hon ble High Court ordered cancellation of penalty thereon. In view of the aforesaid facts and respectf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ange-1, Asansol [in short the ld AO] u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) on 27.05.2011 for the Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The only issue to be decided is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in upholding the levy of penalty u/s 271D of the Act in the sum of ₹ 2,00,000/- in the facts and circumstances of the case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with his father was used by the assessee as he was in urgent need of money. The ld. A.O however observed that the father had bank account on his own and the said payment could have very well been made by account payee cheque or account payee draft to the assessee. With these observations, he levied penalty of ₹ 2,00,000/- u/s 271D of the Act. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee did not make ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his father within the meaning of section 271D of the Act. Hence, the assessee would be out of the rigours of the levy of penalty u/s 271D of the Act. We also find that the assessee had placed reliance on the decision of the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. M. Yasoda in Appeal No.320 of 2010 dated 05.02.2013 wherein the loan received by that assessee from her father-in-law was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
