DCIT Vs Ashwani Gupta (ITAT Jaipur)
ITAT Jaipur held that penalty orders under section 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act passed beyond 6 months from end of the month in which assessments were completed is barred by limitation. Accordingly, appeal of revenue stands dismissed.
Facts- During proceeding, it was noted that the assessee has taken cash amount of Rs. 3,73,44,474/- from Shri Radha Mohan Totla and repaid Rs. 3,81,68,450/- and the action of the assessee violates the provisions of section 269SS/T and therefore, penalty proceedings was initiated by issuing notice u/s. 274 r.w.s. 271D of the Act on 01.07.2024.
Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Jaipur held that the assessee has accepted cash loan of Rs. 3,31,05,285/- from Shri Radha Mohan Totla which is in violation of provisions of section 269SS of the Act liable to penalty as per provisions of section 271D of the Act and accordingly it was order by Addl./Jt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Jaipur that the assessee is liable for levy of penalty of Rs. 3,31,05,285/-.
CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, revenue has preferred the present appeal.
Conclusion- Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Hissaria Brothers has held that Penalty under ss. 271D and 271E-Limitation under s 275- Computation-Penalty orders under ss. 271D and 271E passed beyond six months from the end of the month in which the assessments were completed were barred by limitation-CIT v. Hissaria Bros. (2007) 211 CTR (Raj) 156 affirmed.
