9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Income-tax Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act') was initiated and penalty was levied for acceptance of cash loan of Rs. 3,50,000/- in the assessment u/s 153Cof the Act for the reason that the acceptance of cash loan is in contravention of section 269SS of the Act. 3. Against the order of penalty imposed upon the assessee u/s 271D of the Act, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT (A) and ld. CIT(A) sustained the penalty levied u/s 271D of the Act. 4. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us raising following grounds of appeal :- "BECAUSE, (1) the authorities below have erred in law and on facts in imposing/ sustaining the imposition of penalty under section 271D on the ground that "there is violation of provisions of section 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n ITA Nos.4140 & 4141/MUM/2023 order dated 28.06.2024 wherein the Bench has considered the submission that quantum reassessment order was quashed as void ab initio without dealing with the other issues on merits. On the same addition, penalty proceedings initiated u/s 271D also does not survive by relying on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s. Jayalakshmi Rice Mills (2015) 379 ITR 521 (SC). 6. On the other hand, ld. DR of the Revenue relied on the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that the quantum appeal was quashed on the technical issue and the penalty was levied on merits of the case. 7. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed that the penalty proceedings wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the reassessment order passed in the case of the assessee by the ITAT, the penalty initiated there in u/s. 271D did not survive. 10. We also take note of the distinguishing facts brought before us in respect of the judicial precedents relied upon by the ld. Sr. DR and we agree with the same. We also note that the contentions put forth by the ld. Sr. DR have been dealt with by the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of Karan Empire Pvt. Ltd. (supra) in paragraph 9, wherein it is noted as under: "though undeniably, there is a difference in the facts of both the cases as in the case before the Hon'ble Apex Court, the assessment had been set aside with the direction to frame a fresh assessment. While in the present case before us, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
