9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act") by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) -23, Delhi is against law and facts on the file in as much as he was not justified to partly uphold the action of the Learned Assessing Officer by restricting the penalty levied u/s 271DA of the Act to Rs. 12,60,300/- as against Rs. 25,78,300/- levied by the Ld. Assessing Officer for alleged splitting of bills made by the Appellant Company during the year under consideration and alleged contravention of the provisions of Section 269ST on cash receipts of Rs. 2,00,000/- or more in AY 2018-19 by ignoring the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions filed on behalf of the Appellant Company." 3. The grounds of appeal are related to levy of penalty u/s 271DA of the Income Tax Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section 269ST. The ld. CIT(A) held that no person issues two bills to the same customer for two different items. The ld. CIT(A) opined that if anyone goes to a shop and purchases 10 items, the bill is one for all the items and the payment is also made in one go. 7. Heard the arguments of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. The details are as under: S. No. Name of the Customer Item purchased Date of Invoice Bill Value (in Rs. ) 1 Anubhav Gupta Sherwani kurta Churidar 23.08.2017 155066 2 Anubhav Gupta Shoe 23.08.2017 34000 3 Anubhav Gupta Jodhpuri Trouser 23.08.2017 80500 4 Anubhav Gupta Sherwani Purqree 23.08.2017 22800 5 Anubhav Gupta Shoe 23.08.2017 22000 6 Nisha Bhalla Anar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ude placing restriction on cash transaction by introduction of new sections 269ST & 271DA to the Incometax Act..........." 2. Chapter XX-B which contains the sections 269SS/T/ST, is titled as "Requirement as to mode of acceptance, payment or repayment in certain cases to Counteract Evasion of Tax." 12. We have examined the judicial proposition on this issue. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd Vs. State of Orissa (83 ITR 26) held that held that penalty may not be imposed when there is technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act. 13. Good cause' as defined Lexicon "Reason which is found to be adequate or proper and justified by a court or a competent authority dealing with the matter." 'Sufficient ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansaction is not in doubt. Hence, in our considered opinion, it cannot be held that the breach of law, if any was deliberate. The default, if any, at most be said to be a technical default. It has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hindustan Steels vs. State of Orissa [1972] 83 ITR 26 that penalty cannot be levied merely because the authorities are empowered to levy and when there is technical or venial breach of the provisions of the Act, the authorities competent to impose penalty shall be justified in refusing to impose the penalty." 16. Hence, keeping in view, the entire facts and peculiar circumstances of the case, we hold that no penalty is leviable in this case. 17. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
