9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1093X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m derives income from Purchase & Sale of Cotton Bales, Cotton Cloth, apart from deriving income from Commission. The assesse filed return of income on dated 28.10.2014 declaring income of Rs. 10,60,530/-. However, the assessment was completed vide order dated 29.11.2016 u/s 143(3) at assessed income of Rs. 10,89,810/-. While completing assessment U/s 143(3) of the Act, the A.O. noticed that the assessee has allegedly repaid some loans exceeding Rs. 20,000/- to the cash creditors during the year under consideration, which is in contravention of provisions of S. 269T of the Act. Thereafter, he referred the matter to the JCIT on 31.1.2017 vide letter dated 1872, who issued a show cause dated on 15.02.2017 for imposing penalty u/s 271E, in res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kanwar Lunawat Rs. 4,23,705/-, Rajendra Kumar Lunawat Rs. 20,000/- and Mamta Lunawat Rs. 23,133/- totalling to Rs. 4,66,838/-were required in an emergency need of treatment of Smt. Chand Kanwar Lunawat, who is heart patient and aged 76 years (mother of partner Shri Mahendra Lunawat) and ultimately expired on 07.03.2015 [which fact is not denied neither by the JCIT nor by the ld. CIT(A)] 5. On the other hand, the ld DR has relied on the orders passed by the lower authorities. 6. I have considered the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below and found from the record that the purpose behind the withdrawals was emergency need of medical treatments of those ladies who are having running account with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account of expenditure incurred by him for giving gifts to relatives on behalf of the assessee (HUF) does not amount to loan or deposit within the meaning of s. 269SS and as such, no penalty is leviable under s. 271D. Accordingly, the penalty is cancelled.-Shrepak Enterprises vs. Dy. CIT (1998) 60 TTJ (Ahd) 199: (1998) 64 ITD 300 (Ahd), Muthoot M. George Bankers vs. Asstt. CIT (1993) 47 TTJ (Coch) 434: (1993) 46 ITD 10 (Coch), Dillu Cine Enterprises (P) Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (2002) 80 ITD 484 (Hyd) and Sun Flower Builders (P) Ltd. vs. Dy. CIT (1997) 61 ITD 227 (Pune) relied on." 8. It is pertinent to note that no addition u/s 69 or other provision, was made in the assessment order 29.11.2016 though framed u/s 143(3) meaning thereby the sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Shri Mahendra Lunawat to meet with urgent need of medical treatment expenditure in emergency and hence does not attract penalty. 10. Similar issue has been decided by the Coordinate Bench in the case of Shri Subhash Chand Nyati Vs ACIT In ITA No. 01/JP/2018 wherein it was held as under vide para-7 "3. I have heard the rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. From the record, I found that there are two partners in M/s Rambilas Shiv Kumar Kumar viz Om Prakash Nyati and Ram Bilas Nyati. The assessee Subhash Chand Nyati is brother of Om Prakash Nyati and son of Ram Bilas Nyati. That the family is a joint family and both brothers and father are living together. That family's household expenses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
