TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 315X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ermission of leading additional evidence in contravention of r. 46A of the IT Rules and thereby deleting the penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs levied under s. 271D of the IT Act, by the learned CIT(A). 2. The brief facts of the case are that during the assessment proceedings, the learned AO noticed cash deposits of Rs. 2 lakhs in the name of Praful C. Acharya, HUF and individual. In the opinion of the AO, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by us to our parties. After our request, party paid cash to us, which was deposited by us in our bank account. On telephone talk with our above two parties, parties have explained to us that they have deposited some cheques as transfer in their bank accounts on 15th July, 1999 but by some mistake, bank has not given credit to them on the same day. After our cheque returned, party has informed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other hand, the learned counsel for the assessee relied upon the order of learned CIT(A). 4. We have duly considered the rival contentions. The assessee has elaborately explained in its reply before the AO that Rs. 2 lakha were given to it by the partner, Shri Praful C. Acharya in the capacity of Karta HUF as well as in his individual capacity. Due to some computer problem, these cheques could ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
