The DCIT, Hyderabad V. Sri Ankush Rao Ingle, Hyderabad

ITA 11/HYD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3188 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-06-2010
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 06-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NIVEDITA BISWAS
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM; B P RAJULU
• Section: 271D

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMEBR ITA NO.11/HYD/10 ASSTT. YEAR 2004-05 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7(1), HYDERABAD V/S. ANKESH RAO INGLE, HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SMT. NIVEDITA BISWAS, DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI B.P.RAJULU AND SHRI A.V.RAGHURAM O R D E R PER SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 200 4-05 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A). THE GROUND S OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER: '1. THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)VI) IS ERRONEOUS BOTH ON FACTS AND IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED CIT (A) IS NOT CORRECT IN HOLDING T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED BACK LOANS. 3. THE LEARNED CIT (A) HAS NOT CONSIDERED THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE ADVANCED LOANS EXCEEDING RS.20,000/- I N CASH WHICH WAS ADMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS CONTRAVENING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 269SS' 2. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED O N THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DECISION OF THE HYDERABAD TRIBUNAL IN IT A NO.8, 9 AND 10/HYD/2010 IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05, 2005-06 AND 2006-07 WHEREIN PENALTY LEVIED U/S 271D WAS DELETED BY THE CIT (A) AND THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) WAS CONFIRMED BY ITA NO.11/HYD/2010 SHRI ANKESH RAO INGLE, HYDERABAD. 2 THE TRIBUNAL. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE FACTS OF THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE ARE IDENTICAL WITH THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN ITA NOS. 8, 9 AND 10/HYD/2010 CITED (SUPRA). 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSION. WE FIND THA T THE ISSUE OF LEVY OF PENALTY U/S 271D OF THE ACT IS COVERED IN F AVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE'S OWN CA SE IN ITA NO.8, 9 AND 10/HYD/2010, DATED 19TH MARCH, 2010, SUPRA. WE FIND THAT THE CIT (A) HAS DELETED THE PENALTY IMPOSE D U/S 271D OF THE ACT ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS RECEIVED BACK HIS OW N MONEY IN CASH AND THEREFORE IT CANNOT BE TERMED AS ACCEPTANCE O F LOAN IN CASH AND THE PROVISIONS OF SEC.269SS COULD NOT BE APPLIED WHEN ASSESSEE RECEIVES BACK HIS OWN MONEY IN CASH AND CANCEL THE PEN ALTY IMPOSED U/S 271D OF THE ACT. THERE BEING NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) ON THIS ISSUE, THE SAME IS CONFIRMED AND TH E GROUNDS OF THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 11-6-2010. SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (G.C. GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT PVV/SPS DATE: 11TH JUNE, 2010. COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. SHRI ANKUSH RAO INGLE, PROP: POOJA FINANCE CORPN. NO.15-2-471 KISHENGUNJ, HYDERABAD 2. THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE-7(1), HYD ERABAD. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) V, HYDERABA D. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-VI, HYDERABAD 5 THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD.