9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1655X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the reasons for assuming the jurisdiction, either by himself or by the A.O." 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that, the assessee is a resident individual, filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-2018 on 31.03.2018 declaring total income of Rs. 5,17,490/-. During the financial year relevant to assessment year under consideration, the assessee with two other parties sold an immovable property vide sale deed Document No.22140/2016 dated 29.08.2016 for a total consideration of Rs. 71,82,500/-. The JCIT, Range-15, Hyderabad, initiated penalty proceedings u/sec.271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short "the Act"] for violation of sec.269SS of the Act for accepting sale consideration in cash and accordingly, a show cause notice dated 27.08.2019 was issued and served on the assessee. Due to change in incumbent, an opportunity of being heard were given to the assessee vide it's letter dated 01.02.2020. There has been no compliance from the assessee to the said notice. Therefore, the JCIT, Range-15, Hyderabad passed order u/sec.271D of the Act on 28.02.2020 and levied penalty of Rs. 23,94,166/- u/sec.271D of the Act for contravention of provisions of sec.269SS of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 271D prescribes penalty for taking or accepting any loan or deposit or specified sum. The penalty shall be equal to the amount so taken. c) In this matter, as acceptance of cash during the above transaction fitted into the definition of "Specified sum", a show cause letter was issued to the assessee vide letter in F.No. Addl. CIT/R-15/ 269SS/2019-20 dated 27.08.2019. Due to change in incumbent, an opportunity of being heard was given to the assessee vide this office letter dated: 01.02.2020. However, there had been no compliance from the assessee, to the said notice. d) On perusal of the sale deed it has been held by the AO that, the assessee Sri. T. Yadagiri with two others parties had sold an immovable property, for a total consideration of Rs. 71,82,500/-. The proportionate share of consideration received by the assessee in cash comes to Rs. 23,94,166/-; in contravention to the provision of Section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961 attracting penalty u/s. 271D. e) Despite being given sufficient opportunity, there was no response from the assessee to justify receipt of cash accordingly, Penalty of Rs. 23,94,166/- u/s. 271D of the I.T. Act for the A.Y.2017-18 for violating ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellate proceedings, the appellant has failed to prove the receipt of the alleged sales consideration through allowable modes as mentioned in section 269SS of the Act. f) Instead to prove the same, the appellant after allowing numerous opportunities and finally after 4 years of imposition of the impugned penalty order under consideration have come up with a new explanation which is reproduced in para 4.1 of this order. 4.4. After, going through the impugned order under consideration, reply of the appellant and materials available on record, the undersigned has come to a conclusion that, the claim of appellant i.e. The appellant assessee, for technical purpose, in order to register the sale deed in the name of Mis Sri Sai Ram Constructions, have mentioned in the sale deed as consideration received to make the sale deed legal and to make proper title flow, where in fact assessee has not received any consideration either in cash or through the bank as the same was transferred to his own firm M/s Sri Sal Ram Constructions," is merely afterthought, mischievous and fraudulent. It is pertinent to mention here that transfer of immovable property without consideration or for inadequate c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... light of order of ITAT, Indore Bench in the case of Shri Umakant Sharma, Jhabua vs., JCIT, Ratlam (supra). Further, it is an undisputed fact that, assessee has received consideration in cash because, in the recitals of sale deed, there is no reference of receipt of consideration either by cheque/DD or electronic mode. Therefore, the Assessing Officer has rightly assumed that the assessee has received consideration in cash in contravention of sec.269SS of the Act which warrants penalty u/sec.271D of the Act. The learned CIT(A) after considering the relevant facts has rightly sustained the penalty levied by the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the order of the learned CIT(A) should be upheld. 7. We have heard both the parties, perused the material on record and the orders of the authorities below. The Competent Authority to initiate penalty proceedings u/sec.271D of the Act, 1961 is the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. As per sec.271D of the Act, if a person takes or accepts any loan or deposit or specified sum in contravention of the provisions of section 269SS, he shall be liable to pay, by way of penalty, a sum equal to the amount of the loan or deposit or specified sum so taken o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osing penalty u/sec.271D is invalid. In the present case, since there is no assessment proceedings and the Assessing Officer has forwarded information available with the Department to the JCIT for initiation of penalty proceedings u/sec.271D of the Act, in our considered view, the said action of the Assessing Officer constitute satisfaction and also satisfies the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs., Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (supra). Thus, we reject the ground taken by the assessee. 8. Having said so, let us come back to the second argument of the Learned Counsel for the Assessee in light of decision of ITAT, Indore Bench in the case of Shri Umakant Sharma, Jhabua vs., JCIT, Ratlam (supra). The Learned Counsel for the Assessee made an argument that unless there is a pending assessment proceedings, penalty proceedings u/sec.271D of the Act cannot be initiated. We are afraid to accept the arguments of the Learned Counsel for the Assessee going by the plain reading of sec.271D of the Act. In our considered view, upon reading of sec.271D, the only condition required for initiation of penalty proceedings is that, if a person takes or accepts any loan or deposit or speci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
