Case Law Details
Devinder Gupta & Sons (HUF) Vs CIT (ITAT Delhi)
It is an admitted position that the assessee had taken loan from the lender in the earlier years, a part of which has been repaid during the year albeit in cash. The amount of loan has been consequently reduced. A confirmation whereof from the lender has been filed. The assessment was carried out under Section 143(3) and no question on bona fides of the transaction was raised but however the penalty was imposed mechanically.
Having regard to the series of judicial precedents and the totality of the facts and circumstances noted above, we take a benign view in the matter and cancel the penalty imposed under Section 271E of the Act. The order of the CIT(A) is thus set aside and the penalty imposed is thus reversed and cancelled.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT DELHI
The captioned appeal has been filed by the Assessee seeking to challenge the penalty imposed amounting to Rs.3,40,000/- by the Assessing Officer under Section 271E of the Act and sustained by the CIT(A)-X, New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2013-14.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
