9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1097X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee is an individual. During the year under consideration the assessee sold a property for a consideration of Rs.21,42,000/- vide registered sale deed dated 03/07/2015, and received the entire sale consideration in cash. Hence the learned Assessing Officer passed an order dated 16/03/2022 under section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') by levying penalty of Rs.21,42,000/-. 3. Aggrieved, assessee preferred appeal before the learned CIT(A), and pleaded that the cash was received from the purchaser on the day of registration and before the Jt. Sub Registrar only, due to pressing medical need of his mother. Learned CIT(A), however, did not accept the contention of the assessee, stating that it is only an afterthought and self-s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e will be covered and penalty will be levied of an equivalent to the amount under section 271DA of the Act, which was also simultaneously introduced by the Finance Act, 2017 w.e.f. 01/04/2017. Hence, according to learned AR, this provision of 'specified sum' introduced w.e.f. 01/06/2015 does not hit the assessee's transaction, because on facts, the assessee has not received the amount of cash of Rs. 9,38,000/- as advance, but he received the same in front of the sub-registrar at the time of registration for sale of property. For this, he produced a copy of the registered sale deed for verification, which was not denied by the Learned assessing officer. 5. Per contra, learned DR placed heavy reliance on the orders of the authorities bel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on (iv) to section 269SS, which is reproduced as under : "(iv) "specified sum" means any sum of money receivable, whether as advance or otherwise, in relation to transfer of an immovable property, whether or not the transfer takes place." 8. The meaning of the "specified sum" has also been dealt with by a Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Shri. R. Dhinagharan (HUF), ITA No. 3329/Chny/2019, dated 28/12/2023, wherein the ITAT took the view that the ' sum specified' as per Explanation to Section 269SS of the Act, only applicable for advance receivable, namely, 'as advance or otherwise' means advance can be in any manner, and therefore, this provision will not apply to the transaction that happens when the final payme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the given facts and circumstances of the case and hence, penalty is not exigible in this case. Hence, we confirm the order of CIT(A) deleting the penalty but on entirely different ground i.e., on jurisdictional issue only. Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed." 9. In the present case before us, it is an admitted fact that the assessee received the amount of cash of Rs.9,38,000/- not as advance, but as the final payment in front of the Sub-Registrar at the time of registration for sale of property. While respectfully following the view taken by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of R. Dhinagharan(HUF) (supra), we hold that there is no violation of provisions of section 269SS of the Act in the present case in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
