TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1093X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms of Sec 273B. The funds were needed for an urgent requirement made at the hospital at Ahmedabad towards the treatment of mother. The assessee therefore, paid the amount through different family members, who are close relative of the partners of the firm Shri Sampatraj Lunawat and Shri Mahendra Lunawat to meet with urgent need of medical treatment expenditure in emergency and hence does not attract penalty. No justification for the penalty so imposed U/s 271E - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 743/JP/2017 - - - Dated:- 20-2-2020 - Shri Ramesh C Sharma, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv) For the Revenue : Ms. Chanchal Meena (JCIT) ORDER PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wat at Ahmedabad. However, rejecting explanation of the assessee, he imposed penalty u/s 271E of ₹ 7,98,338/-. 3. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. against which the assessee is in further appeal before the ITAT. 4. It was argued by the ld AR of the assessee that Sec. 269T cannot be invoked unless the department establish that what the assessee repaid was a loan or deposit. The subjected payments in the case of M/s Noratmal Lunawat HUF ₹ 55,000/-. Nirmala Kumari Lunawat (Wife) ₹ 41,500/- and Umrao Kanwar Lunawat (Mother) ₹ 20,000/-, Amit Kumar Lunawat (Son) ₹ 85,000/-, Vinit Kumar Lunawat (Son) ₹ 30,000/-, Sunita Lunawat (Daughter in Law) ₹ 1,00,000/- t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tives as stated by the A.O. frequent repayment with no fixed period of odd amount shows no loan. Furthermore, it is not denied that the subjected amounts were paid to the blood/close relatives of the assessee who cannot be termed as a ban in the strict legal sense of the term. The various Benches of the ITAT have been consistently, taking a view that any amount paid to the close relative cannot be treated as a loan or deposit. There is no Transfer as such between two closely related persons, which is a condition precedent, so as to validly invoke sec. 269SS or 269 for that reason. 7. In the case of Krishna Kr. Pathak (HUF) vs. ITO (2004) 90 TTJ 0940 (Kol Trib), the Tribunal have held as under: The assessee (HUF) and the K ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le Court has held as under: Appellate authority as well as the Tribunal having found that the transaction in question is a genuine transaction and that the assessee has shown reasonable course for accepting loan in cash in violation of s. 269SS, such finding of fact cannot be disturbed by the Court and no substantial question of law arises for determination. Moreover, the provision of 269T and 269SS has been enacted in order to prevent the increase in black money and to stop tax evasion. The intention of the legislature was not to cover the bonafide and genuine transaction wherein the AO himself was satisfied and no tax evasion/use of the black money was involved. 9. I also observe that a genuine transaction made in an em ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... buja Proteins Ltd. (89 TTJ 324) has held that where account of sister concern was credited by the assessee by journal entries on account of payment made by sister concern on behalf of the assessee, there was no violation of the provisions of Section 269SS of the Act. Moreover, the transaction between the assessee and sister concern M/s Ram Bilas Shiv Kumar was current account in nature and was not a loan or deposit and hence there is no violation of section 269SS as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CIT vs ldhayam Publication Ltd. (285 1TR 221) Copy of account of the assessee in the books of sister concern M/s Rambilas Shivkumar clear indicate that it is a current account and as such provisions of Section 269SS/ 27 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
