9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 863X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : Appellant, M/s. Malik Movies Organiser Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') by filing the present appeal sought to set aside the impugned order dated 21.11.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)22, New Delhi confirming the penalty levied u/s 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act') on the grounds inter alia that :- "1. That i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the assessee, AO proceeded to levy the penalty to the tune of Rs. 6,00,000/- equal to 100% of amount of loan or deposit so taken by the assessee in cash u/s 271D of the Act. 3. Assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT (A) by way of filing the appeal who has confirmed the penalty by dismissing the appeal. Feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the ld. CIT (A), the assessee has come up be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dispute that assessee company has taken the defence that it has to issue a bank guarantee of Rs. 5,00,000/- to Delhi Doordarshan Kendra immediately within 2 - 3 days and Shri Sanjay Malik was having no sufficient time and as such, keeping in view the contingency, he deposited the cash into the bank account and from FDR bought a cheque to be given as bank guarantee. It is also not in dispute that A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 13 episodes on 31.03.2015. 8. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the order passed by the AO as well as ld. CIT (A) and contended that assessee has failed to bring on record any genuine reason for accepting the loan in cash. 9. We are of the considered view that when in the instant case undisputedly AO has verified the claim of the assessee as to taking loan of Rs. 6,0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
