Income Tax

No penalty u/s 271D when cash loans treated as undisclosed income u/s 68

No penalty u/s 271D can be levied when cash loans were treated as undisclosed income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act – ITAT

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2743 (2019) (01) ITAT

Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon:
Diwan Enterprises vs. CIT

CIT vs. Standard Brands Ltd.

The appellant assessee had filed the present appeal seeking to set aside the impugned order passed by the CIT (Appeals) confirming the penalty levied u/s 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

The assessee has availed cash loans. The AO completed the assessment u/s 143(3) treating the cash loan as unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Act and added the same to the income of the assessee holding that the assessee had failed to prove the creditworthiness of the creditors.

Penalty proceedings u/s 271D of the Act were also initiated for violation of provisions contained u/s 269SS of the Act. Declining the contentions raised by the assessee, AO proceeded to levy the penalty u/s 271D of the Act.

Assessee carried the matter before the CIT (A) who confirmed the penalty by dismissing the appeal.

Before the Tribunal, the assessee contended that when the AO had treated the amount of cash loans as unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Act and thereby treated the same as income of the assessee, the same cannot be treated as loan and hence penalty u/s 271D could not be levied.

The Tribunal noted that the quantum addition on the basis of which penalty had been initiated, had been accepted by the assessee.

The Tribunal observed that when, the Revenue had treated the amount of loans obtained in cash as undisclosed income of the assessee u/s 68 of the Act, it could not treat the same as a loan though taken in cash in the same breath so as to initiate the penalty proceedings u/s 271D of the Act.

The Tribunal pointed out that on the one hand, the Revenue cannot treat the cash loans as undisclosed income in the hands of assessee u/s 68 of the Act and at the same time, initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271D against the assessee for violation of provisions contained u/s 269SS of the Act as the same had not remained as loan in the hands of assessee.

Following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court, the Tribunal opined that penalty levied by the AO and confirmed by the CIT (A) was not sustainable in the eyes of law, hence ordered it to be deleted.

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Prima facie satisfaction u/s 148 can not be a non-existing or incorrect information

The prima facie satisfaction u/s 148 cannot be stretched to a non-existing information or incorrect information - ITAT In a…

14 hours ago
  • SEBI

Mutual Funds to value physical Gold and Silver by using the polled spot prices

Mutual Funds to value physical Gold and Silver by using the polled spot prices published by the recognized stock exchanges…

23 hours ago
  • bankruptcy

SC allows simultaneous CIRP proceedings against principal debtor & corporate guarantor

Supreme Court allows simultaneous CIRP proceedings against principal debtor and its corporate guarantor, declines to frame any guidelines In a…

23 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Merely because sales were declared for only one month, same cannot be treated as bogus

Merely because assessee had declared sales for only one month, the same cannot be treated as bogus on the basis…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

ITAT deleted addition as method of accounting had been accepted in earlier years

ITAT deleted addition as the method of accounting had been accepted by the department in earlier years and the entire…

3 days ago
  • Benami

Orders passed under Benami Act cannot be challenged under IBC 2016 – SC

Orders passed under Benami Act cannot be challenged under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - SC In a recent judgment,…

4 days ago