SMT. CHHAYA A SAJNANI, Jaipur V. ADD. CIT, Jaipur

ITA 894/JPR/2012

• Counselvise Citation: 89423114 RSA 2012
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-11-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-11-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: O P BHATEJA
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH AGARWAL
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Tax effect
• Section: 68; 273B

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES SMC, JAIPUR JH IH-DS-CALY] YS[KK LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI P.K. BANSAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VK;DJ VIHY LA- @ ITA NO. 894/JP/2012 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z @ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2007-08 CHHAYA SAJNANI, PROP.- M/S VOICE OF GEMS, 607, VIDHYADHAR KA RASTA, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. ADDL.CIT, RANGE-1, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ L A-@ PAN/GIR NO.: ABTPA 3604 J VIHYKFKHZ @ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ @ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS @ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (CA) JKTLO DH VKSJ LS @ REVENUE BY : SHRI O.P. BHATEJA (ADDL.CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[ K@ DATE OF HEARING : 04/11/2015 MN?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[ K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06/11/2015 VKNS'K @ ORDER PER P.K. BANSAL, A.M. THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19/09/2012 PASSED BY THE LD CIT(A)-I, JAIPUR FOR A.Y . 2007-08 AGAINST THE SUSTENANCE OF PENALTY BY THE LD CIT(A) LEVIED U/ S 271D OF THE INCOME ITA 894/JP/2012_ CHHAYA SAJNANI VS. ADDL. CIT 2 TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT) BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER AMOUNTING TO RS. 3 LACS. 2. I HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND CAREFULLY CONSIDERED THE SAME ALONGWITH ORDERS OF THE TAX AUTH ORITIES BELOW, I NOTED THAT IN THIS CASE THE LD ASSESSING OFFICER NO TED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN LOAN/ADVANCES IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 269 SS OF THE ACT FROM HER HUSBAND AND ACCORDINGLY HE IMPOSED THE PENALTY U/S 271D OF THE ACT. IT IS FACT THAT THE LOAN TAKEN FROM THE HUSBAND BY THE ASSESSEE HAS DULY BEEN ACCEPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS GENUINE A ND NO ADDITION U/S 68 OF THE ACT HAS BEEN MADE. THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE CASH RECEIVED FROM THE H USBAND HAS BEEN DEPOSITED INTO THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS TO MAKE THE PAYMENT TO THE SUPPLIERS AND FOR EMI OF TH E CAR LOAN. IN RESPECT OF EACH OF THE AMOUNT, FOLLOWING EXPLANATION WAS GIVEN: S. NO. AMOUNT DATE OF RECEIPT NAME OF BANK & A/C NO. REMARKS 1. 1,00,000.00 29/12/2006 ICICI BANK/ 031505003040 CASH DEPOSITED INTO BANK ACCOUNT FOR MAKING PAYMENT TO M/S AKRITI INTERIORS DECORATORS. 2. 50,000.00 02/01/2007 ICICI BANK 031505003040 CASH DEPOSITED INTO BANK ACCOUNT FOR MAKING PAYMENT TO ITA 894/JP/2012_ CHHAYA SAJNANI VS. ADDL. CIT 3 M/S VANDANA PRODUCTS. 3. 1,00,000.00 18/01/2007 ICICI BANK 031505003040 CASH DEPOSITED INTO BANK ACCOUNT FOR MAKING PAYMENT TO FOLLOWING PARTIES: 1. GEMS & JEWELLERY EXPORT, 3,5000.00 2. ROYAL COMPUTERS 50,000.00 3. SIGHT AND SOUND INDIA 56,000.00 4. 50,000.00 01/03/2007 CORPORATION BANK 003016 TO REPAY BANK OVERDRAFT OF 26,428.07 ON 01/03/2007 AND FOR MAKING PAYMENT OF EMI OF CAR LOAN OF 23,525.00 I AM OF THE VIEW THAT THE LEVIED OF PENALTY U/S 271D IS NOT AUTOMATIC THE PENALTY HAS NOT TO BE IMPOSED IN EACH AND EVERY CAS E WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE THE DEFAULT U/S 269SS OF THE ACT. THE PROVISION OF SECTION 273B OF THE ACT CLEARLY PROVIDES THAT WHERE THE ASSESSEE HAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR COMMITTING THE DEFAULT, NO PEN ALTY CAN BE IMPOSED ON THE ASSESSEE. 2.1 IN THIS CASE IN NOTED THAT IN RESPECT OF DEPOSI T OF CASH RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HER HUSBAND AMOUNTING TO RS. 3 LA CS ON DIFFERENT DATES AS DETAILED ABOVE HAS BEEN DIRECTLY DEPOSITED BY TH E HUSBAND IN THE BANK ITA 894/JP/2012_ CHHAYA SAJNANI VS. ADDL. CIT 4 ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE HAS IMMEDI ATELY USED THE SAID MONEY FOR MAKING THE PAYMENT TO VARIOUS PARTIES AND MAKING THE PAYMENT FOR EMI OF THE CAR LOAN. I ALSO PERUSED THE BANK STATEMENT, COPY OF WHICH WAS FILED BEFORE ME IN THE PAPER BOOK. IN TH E PAPER BOOK AT PAGE NO. 9 TO 12, WHICH WAS DULY VERIFIED DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING. THE HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SUNIL KUMAR GOEL (2009) 315 ITR 163 (P&H) (HEAD NOTE) HELD AS UNDER:- HELD, THAT THERE WAS NO DISPUTE ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE CASH TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASSESSEE WERE WITH THE SISTER C ONCERN AND THESE TRANSACTIONS WERE WITHIN THE FAMILY AND DUE TO BUSI NESS EXIGENCY. A FAMILY TRANSACTION, BETWEEN TWO INDEPENDENT ASSESSE ES, BASED ON AN ACT OF CASUALNESS, SPECIALLY IN A CASE WHERE THE DI SCLOSURE THEREOF WAS CONTAINED IN THE COMPILATION OF ACCOUNTS, AND WHICH HAD NO TAX EFFECT, ESTABLISHED REASONABLE CAUSE UNDER SECTION 273B O F THE ACT. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD SATISFACTORILY ESTABLISHED REASON ABLE CAUSE UNDER SECTION 273B OF THE ACT, HE MUST BE DEEMED TO HAVE ESTABLISHED SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR NOT INVOKING THE PENAL PROVISIO NS OF SECTIONS 271D AND 271E OF THE ACT AGAINST HIM. THE DELETION OF PE NALTY BY THE TRIBUNAL WAS VALID. THEREFORE, THE HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT D ELETED THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 271D OF THE ACT. THE SAID JUDGMENT IN M Y OPINION IS EQUALLY APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSES SEE HAS TAKEN THE CASH ITA 894/JP/2012_ CHHAYA SAJNANI VS. ADDL. CIT 5 LOAN FROM HER HUSBAND FOR BUSINESS EXIGENCIES AND T HEREFORE, NO QUESTION OF EVADING THE TAX ARISES. NO CONTRARY DECISION WAS BROUGHT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. I, ACCORDINGLY, DELETE THE PENALTY IMPOSE D U/S 271D OF THE ACT. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASS ESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON .. SD/- IH-DS-CALY (P.K. BANSAL) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER TK;IQJ @ JAIPUR FNUKAD @ DATED:- 06 TH NOVEMBER, 2015 *RANJAN VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR @ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ @ THE APPELLANT- SMT. CHHAYA SAJNANI, JAIPUR 2. IZR;FKHZ @ THE RESPONDENT- THE ADDL.CIT,RANGE-1, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDR @ CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ @ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY @ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 894/JP/2012) VKNS'KKUQLKJ @ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ @ ASST. REGISTRAR