ACIT, Jaipur V. AKSHAY KUMAR, Jaipur

ITA 999/JPR/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5359 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 20-12-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDHARTH RANKA DHK
• Keywords: Reasonable cause
• Section: 273B; 27

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR JH VH-VKJ-EHUK] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH YFYR DQEKJ] U;KF; D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI T.R.MEENA, AM & SHRI LALIET KUMAR, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NOS. 999/JP/2013 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEARS : 200 9-10. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 1, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR, 73/314-A, AGARWAL FARM, MANSAROVAR, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN/GIR NO. ACWPK 8523 C VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI KAILASH MANGAL (JCIT) FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY S BY : SHRI SIDDHARTH RANKA (ADVOCATE) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 22.02.2016. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K @ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18/03/2016. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI LALIET KUMAR, J.M. THE PRESENT APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ARISING FROM THE ORDER DATED 17.10.2013 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT (A)-I, JAIPUR FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10 WHEREBY THE LD. CIT (A) HAS DELETED THE PENALTY LEVIED UNDER SE CTION 271D OF THE IT ACT. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE AO HAS IMPOSED THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271D OF THE IT ACT FOR RS. 19,00,000/- ON A CCOUNT OF CASH DEPOSIT MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. BEFORE IMPOSING THE PENALTY, THE AO HAS MENTIONED AS UNDER :- ON EXAMINATION OF ITS DETAIL, IT HAS BEEN OBSERVE D THAT A SUM OF RS. 19,00,000/- HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN CASH IN THE B ANK OF RAJASTHAN, KOTA. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PR OCEEDINGS, THE ASSESSEE WAS TO EXPLAIN SOURCE OF DEPOSIT. IT HAS B EEN SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE, VIDE REPLY DATED 1.11.2011 THAT : 2 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR I HAVE DEPOSITED ON 16 TH DEC. 2008, CASH OF RS. 19,00,000/- IN MY ACCOUNT 149442 THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN, KOTA DURING THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2008-09. THE AMOUNT WAS RECEIVED DUE TO SALE O F THE IMMOVABLE PARENTAL PROPERTY IN THE NAME OF MY FATHE R AND AUNTY (WIDOW OF MY UNCLE). THIS ACCOUNT WAS USE BY ME AS MY FATHER WAS NOT HAVING THE PAN NUMBER FOR BANK TRANSACTION AT THAT TIME. I SUPPORTED HIM AS A WITNESS FOR THE MONEY TRANSFER . LATER THE AMOUNT WAS DISBURSED BACK TO HIM AND MY AUNTY. DETAILS REGARDING THAT TRANSACTION I.E. REGISTRY CO PY OF AGREEMENT OF PROPERTY SALE, COPY OF MY BANK ACCOUNT 149442 AND COPY OF THE ITR 2 FILED BY MY FATHER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-1 0 TO YOUR GOOD OFFICE HAS ALREADY BEEN SUBMITTED DURING THE C OURSE OF ASSESSMENT IN JULY, 2011. IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THAT SHRI NIRANJAN LAL SHARMA, FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD AN AGRICULTURE LAND SITUATED AT V ILLAGE TEKHDA, TEHSIL LADPURA,KOTA, RAJASTHAN FOR RS. 30 LACS ON 1 5.12.2008 THROUGH AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SELF, FAMILY MEMBERS O F HIS DECEASED BROTHER AND RECEIVED RS. 19,50,000/- IN CA SH ON THE DATE OF AGREEMENT I.E. 15.12.2008 AND THE SALE HAD BEEN REGISTERED ON 16.2.2009. IN HIS AFFIDAVIT DATED 8.11.2011 (PLACED ON FILE) HE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT AMOUNT OF RS. 19,00,000/- IN CA SH WAS DEPOSITED IN HIS SONS SHRI AKSHAY KUMARS SAVING B ANK ACCOUNT. THE SAME WAS RETURNED BY HIM AS UNDER : (I) BY CHEQUE NO. 116031 (RS.10,00,000/-) DATED 16.12.2 008. (II) BY CHEQUE NO. 116034(RS.4,00,000/-) DATED 6.1.2009. (III) BY CHEQUE NO. 116032 (RS.5,00,000/-) DATED 22.12.20 08 TO HIS AUNTY MRS. VINITA SHARMA. KEEPING IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE AND AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE, THE SOURCE OF DEPOSIT IS HELD TO BE GENUI NE BUT IN VIOLATION THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 269SS, THE ASSE SSEE HAS TAKE/ACCEPTED DEPOSIT OF RS. 19,00,000/- OTHERWISE THAN BY AN ACCOUNT PAYEE CHEQUES OR ACCOUNT PAYEE BANK DRAFT, WHICH ATTRACTS PENAL PROVISIONS AS LAID DOWN IN SECTION 271D. THER EFORE, PENALTY PROCEEDINGS ARE INITIATED. 3 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR 3. FEELING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER PASSED BY THE AO, THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT (A). THE LD. CIT ( A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE REPLY OF THE ASSESSEE HAS DELETED THE PENALTY WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS :- 4. I HAVE CONSIDERED SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT AND HAVE ALSO GONE THROUGH THE PENALTY ORDER. A PERUSAL OF T HE ORDER SHOWS THAT PENALTY HAS BEEN LEVIED BY THE ADDL. CIT ON TH E GROUND THAT THE APPELLANT HAD DEPOSITED A SUM OF RS.19,00,000/- IN CASH IN HIS SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT. THE APPELLANTS CLAIM IS THAT THIS AMOUNT OF RS. 19,00,000/- IN CASH WAS RECEIVED BY HIS FATHER AS ADVANCE ON SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. THE AMOUNT HAD TO BE DEP OSITED IN THE APPELLANTS ACCOUNT AS HIS FATHER DID NOT HAVE PAN AND THE SAID AMOUNT WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY ANY BANK IN THE ABSENCE OF PAN. 4.1. IT IS, HOWEVER, NOTICED THAT THE ADDL. CIT HAS NOT GIVEN ANY FINDING AS TO WHETHER THE APPELLANT HAD ANY REASONA BLE CAUSE FOR DEPOSITING THE CASH IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. IT IS AN A CCEPTED LEGAL PRINCIPLE THAT LEVY OF PENALTY IS NOT AUTOMATIC. TH E FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING A PARTICULAR TRANSACTION HAVE TO BE LOOKED INTO BEFORE DECIDING AS TO WHETHER PENAL PRO VISIONS ARE ATTRACTED IN A PARTICULAR CASE OF NOT. 4.2. A PERUSAL OF THE DETAILS FILED BY THE APPELLAN T SHOWS THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 19,00,000/- IN CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT ON 16.12.2008. RS. 10,00,000/- OUT OF THIS AMOUNT WAS TRANSFERRED THE SAME DAY TO THE SAVINGS BANK ACCOUN T OF HIS FATHER SHRI NIRANJAN. ANOTHER AMOUNT OF RS. 4,00,000/- WA S TRANSFERRED TO HIS FATHERS ACCOUNT ON 06.01.2009. RS. 5,00,000/- WAS TRANSFERRED TO SMT. VINITA, THE CO-OWNER OF THE LAND ON 22.12.2 008. IT IS FURTHER NOTED THAT AS PER THE AGREEMENT AND AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE APPELLANT, THE MOUNT OF RS. 19,50,000/- WAS RECEIVE D BY THE APPELLANTS FATHER IN CASH IN TERMS OF THE AGREEMEN T TO SELL THE LAND DATED 15.12.2008. THE PAN WAS ALLOTTED TO HIM (THE APPELLANTS FATHER SHRI NIRANJAN) ONLY ON 24.12.2008. HENCE, TH E APPELLANTS FATHER COULD NOT DEPOSIT THE CASH IN HIS OWN BANK A CCOUNT. THESE FACTS SHOW THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR DE POSITING RS. 19,00,000/- IN CASH IN THE APPELLANTS BANK ACCOUNT . 4.3. IT IS FURTHER NOTED THAT EVEN THE ADDL. CIT HA S ACCEPTED THESE FACTS MENTIONED IN THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPE LLANT. IN THE PENALTY ORDER, THE ADDL. CIT HAS OBSERVED AS UNDER : 4 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED THAT SHRI NRANJAN LAL SHARMA , FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE HAS SOLD AN AGRICULTURE LAND SITUATED AT V ILLAGE TEKHDA, TEHSIL LADPURA, KOTA, RAJASTHAN FOR RS. 30,00,000/- ON 15.12.2008 THROUGH AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SELF, FAMILY MEMBERS O F HIS DECEASED BROTHER AND RECEIVED RS. 19,50,000/- IN CA SH O THE DATE OF AGREEMENT I.E. 15.12.2008 AND THE SALE HAD BEEN REGISTERED ON 16.02.2009. IN HIS AFFIDAVIT DATED 08.11.2011 (PLAC ED ON FILE) HE HAS ALSO SUBMITTED THAT AMOUNT OF RS.19,00,000/- IN CASH WAS DEPOSITED IN HIS SONS SHRI AKSHAY KUMARS SAVING B ANK ACCOUNT. THE SAME WAS RETURNED BY AS UNDER :- (I) BY CHEQUE NO. 116031 (RS.10,00,000/-) DATED 16.12.2 008. (II) BY CHEQUE NO. 116034(RS.4,00,000/-) DATED 6.1.2009. (III) BY CHEQUE NO. 116032 (RS.5,00,000/-) DATED 22.12.20 08 TO HIS AUNTY MRS. VINITA SHARMA. THUS, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT EVEN THE ADDL. CIT HAS NOT QUESTIONED THE FACTS STATED BY THE APPELLANT AND THE BONAFIDE NATU RE OF THE DEPOSITS MADE IN THE APPELLANTS ACCOUNT THESE FACT S CLEARLY SHOW THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR FAILURE ON PART OF THE APPELLANT TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE SEC. 269SS. IT HAS BEEN HELD BY THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF K. FINANCE & CHIT CO. (283 ITR 329), AND DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF PARMA NAND (266 ITR 255), THAT WHERE RECEIPT OF DEPOSIT IN CAS H WAS EXPLAINED ON THE GROUND THAT THE DEPOSITOR DID NOT HAVE BANK ACCOUNT AND THE TRANSACTIONS WERE GENUINE, CANCELLATION OF PENA LTY BY THE TRIBUNAL WAS CORRECT. THE PENALTY, THEREFORE, APPEA RS TO BE UNCALLED FOR AND IS, ACCORDINGLY, CANCELLED. 4. THE REVENUE FEELING AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF LD . CIT (A), HAS CHALLENGED THE ORDER BEFORE US. THE LD. D/R HAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A SALARIED PERSON AND THE CASH AMOUNT HAS BEEN DEPOSITED IN THE ACCOUNT I N VIOLATION OF SECTION 271D AND, THEREFORE, PENALTY IS REQUIRED TO BE UPHELD AND THE EXPLANATION GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. WHEREAS ON THE OTH ER HAND, THE LD. A/R HAS SUBMITTED THAT IN PURSUANCE OF THE NOTICE, THE ASSESSEE HAS G IVEN A DETAILED REPLY AND THE REPLY 5 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR WAS DULY CONSIDERED BY THE LD. CIT (A) AND THEREAFT ER THE PENALTY HAS BEEN DELETED. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, WE ARE HEREBY REPRODUCING THE REPLY FURNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE AS UNDER :- THAT THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A/C NO. 149 442 THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD., KOTA OF THE APPELLANT ON 16.12.2 008 OF RS. 19,00,000/- WAS OF HIS FATHER WHICH WAS RECEIVED TO HIM AGAINST THE ADVANCE AMOUNT ON SALE OF AGRICULTURAL LAND. DU E TO NON AVAILABILITY OF PAN WITH THE FATHER AT THE TIME OF DEPOSIT, THE SAID MOUNT WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE BANKER AND COULD NOT BE DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A/C OF THE FATHER OF THE APPELLANT. THE AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A/C OF THE APPELLANT ON 16.12 .2008 & THE PAN CCVPS 8679 C WAS ALLOTTED TO HIS FATHER ON 24.1 2.2008 I.E. AFTER THE DATE OF THE DEPOSIT OF AMOUNT IN THE BANK . A COPY OF SALE AGREEMENT, BANK A/C AND PAN CARD ALONG WITH ALLOTME NT LETTER IS HEREBY ENCLOSED. THE AMOUNT DEPOSITED IN THE BANK A /C OF THE APPELLANT WAS RETURNED BACK BY HIM TO HIS FATHER & AUNTY (CO- OWNER) BY CHEQUE AS UNDER :- DATE CHEQUE NO. AMOUNT 16.12.2008 116031 10,00,000/- (SAME DAY OF DEPOS IT) 22.12.2008 116032 5,00,000/- (SMT. VINITA DEVI CO-SHARES OF LAND) 06.01.2009 116034 4,00,000/- THE SAME IS ALSO REFLECTED IN THE BANK STATEMENT OF THE APPELLANT AND HIS FATHER. AT THE TIME OF THE SALE DEED OF THE LAND, AN AMOUNT OF RS. 10,50,000/- WAS RECEIVED IN CASH ON 16.02.20 09 BY FATHER OF THE APPELLANT AND THE SAME AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED BY HIM IN HIS A/C NO. 107215. THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN LTD. KOTA AS HE WAS HAVING PAN AT THAT TIME. A COPY OF SALE DEED & BANK STATEM ENT IS HEREBY ENCLOSED. AT THE TIME OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, AN AFFIDAVIT BY FATHER OF THE APPELLANT WAS ALSO FILED STATING THE ABOVE FACTS. A COPY OF AFFIDAVIT IS ALSO HEREBY ENCLOSED. THE FATH ER OF THE APPELLANT ALSO DECLARED THE ABOVE TRANSACTION IN HI S IT RETURN FOR THAT AY 2009-10 UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM CAPITAL GAIN AND THE DUE TAX WAS ALSO DEPOSITED BY HIM. A COPY OF RE TURN IS HEREBY ENCLOSED. 6 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR THAT IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES THERE WAS A REASONABLE C AUSE WITH THE APPELLANT TO DEPOSIT THE CASH RECEIVED BY HIS FATHE R IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT. UNDER SECTION 273B IT HAS BEEN CLEARLY MEN TIONED THAT NO PENALTY SHALL BE IMPOSABLE ON THE PERSON OR THE ASSESSEE, AS THE CASE MAY BE, FOR ANY FAILURE REFERRED TO IN THE SAID PROVISIONS IF HE PROVES THAT THERE WAS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE SAID FAILURE. THE APPELLANT HAS PROVED THE REASONABLE CAUSE IN DE POSITING THE CASH IN HIS BANK A/C BY HIS FATHER. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 273B ARE CLEARLY APPLICABLE IN THE CASE OF THE APPELLANT . 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTION OF THE PARTIE S AND HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE RECORD. SECTION 273B PROVIDES AS UNDER :- SEC. 273B. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THE PROVISI ONS OF CLAUSE (B) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 271, SECTI ON 271A, SECTION 271AA, SECTION 271B, SECTION 271BA, SECTION 271BB, SECTION 271C, SECTION 271CA, SECTION 271D, SECTION 271E, SECTION 271F, SECTION 27 1FA, SECTION 271FB,, SECTION 271G, CLAUSE (C) OR CLAUSE (D) OF SUB-SECTI ON (1) OR SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 272A, SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 272AA O R SECTION 272B R SUB- SECTION (1) OR SUB-SECTION (1A) OF SECTION 272BB OR SUB-SECTION (1) OF SECTION 272BBB OR CLAUSE (B) OF SUB-SECTION (1) OR CLAUSE (B) OR CLAUSE (C) OF SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 273, NO PENALTY SHALL BE IMPOSABLE ON THE PERSON OR THE ASSESSEE, AS THE CASE MAY BE, FOR ANY FAILURE REFERRED TO IN THE SAID PROVISIONS IF HE PROVES THAT THERE WAS REA SONABLE CAUSE FOR THE SAID FAILURE. FROM THE BARE READING OF SECTION 273B IT IS CLEAR T HAT THE IMPOSITION OF PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271D IS NOT AUTOMATIC AND THE PENALTY SHALL NOT BE IMPOSED ON THE ASSESSEE MERELY ON BREACHING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271D. IF THE ASSESSEE GIVES THE REASONABLE CAUSE, THEN IN THAT EVENTUALITY THE PENA LTY SHALL NOT BE IMPOSED ON THE 7 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR ASSESSEE. IN THE PRESENT CASE IT IS AN UNDISPUTED FACT THAT THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS AUNTI AND COUSIN HAVE ENTERED INTO AN AGREE MENT WITH ONE NATHU LAL FOR SALE OF LAND AND ON ACCOUNT OF SALE OF LAND, A SUM OF RS. 1 9,50,000/- WAS RECEIVED IN CASH. IT IS ALSO AN ADMITTED FACT THAT THE AMOUNT OF RS. 19.50 LAKHS WAS DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE IN HIS BANK ACCOUNT AS THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE W AS NOT HAVING THE PAN. MOREOVER, THE SAID AMOUNT WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY THE BANKER OF T HE FATHER. THE AMOUNT WAS THEREAFTER DEPOSITED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT ON 16.12.2 008 BY THE ASSESSEE. IMMEDIATELY AFTER DEPOSITING THE AMOUNT, THE AMOUNT OF RS. 10,0 0,000/- WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE SHRI NIRANJAN LAL SHARMA AND THE REMAINING AMOUNT WAS DEPOSITED BY THE ASSESSEE THROUGH ACCOUN T PAYEE CHEQUE IN THE ACCOUNTS OF SMT. VINITA DEVI W/O LATE SHRI MAHESH KUMAR AND SHRI ASHISH SHARMA SON OF LATE SHRI MAHESH KUMAR. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED AN AFFID AVIT WITH THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE FATHER OF THE ASSESSEE APPELLANT HAS ALSO DECLARED SALE TRANSACTION IN HIS INCOME TAX RETURN FOR A.Y. 2009-10. IN OUR VIEW, THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR RECEIVING THE AMOUNT IN HIS ACCOUNT AND THEREAFTER SUBSEQUENTLY TRANSFERRED THE SAID AMOUNT TO THE ACCOUNT OF HIS FATHER AND ALSO THE AC COUNT OF AUNTI SMT. VINITA SHARMA AND IN THE ACCOUNT OF SHRI ASHISH SHARMA, COUSIN OF THE ASSESSEE. IN OUR VIEW, SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR NOT C OMPLYING WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 271D, AND THE REASONABLE CAUSE GIVEN BY THE ASSESSEE IS PLAUSIBLE, IN VIEW THEREOF WE HAVE NO HESITATION TO UPHOLD THE ORDER P ASSED BY LD. CIT (A) BY VIRTUE OF WHICH THE LD. CIT (A) HAS DELETED THE PENALTY UNDER SECTION 271D. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. OUR VIEW IS AL SO SUPPORTED BY THE VARIOUS 8 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR PRONOUNCEMENTS OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH C OURT, TRIBUNAL AND OTHER COURTS, WHICH WE ARE NOT REPRODUCING HEREIN. THE SAID JUDG MENTS HAVE BEEN FILED ON RECORD BY THE LD. A/R FOR THE ASSESSEE AT PAGES 31 TO 97 OF T HE PAPER BOOK. WE ARE ONLY REFERRING HEREIN THE LATEST JUDGMENT IN THE MATTER OF CIT VS. SMT. DIMPLE YADAV, 61 TAXMANN.COM 219 WHEREIN HONBLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COUR T IN PARA 16 OF ITS ORDER HAD HELD AS UNDER :- 16. IN THE LIGHT OF THE AFORESAID, WE FIND THAT E VEN THOUGH THE ASSESSEE HAD TAKEN A LOAN IN CASH, NONETHELESS, THE LOAN TRA NSACTION WAS A GENUINE TRANSACTION AND WAS ROUTED THROUGH THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE WHICH CLEARLY SHOWS THE BONA FIDES OF THE ASSESSEE. THE CASH GIVEN BY THE LENDER WAS NOT UNACCOUNTED MONEY BUT WAS DULY REFLE CTED IN THEIR BOOKS OF ACCOUNT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER ALSO ACCEPTED THE EXPLANATION AND FOUND THE TRANSACTION TO BE GENUINE. THE CONTENTION OF TH E LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT THAT SINCE THERE WAS NO URGENCY, THE ASSESSEE COULD HAVE TAKEN THE LOAN THROUGH CHEQUE AND SHOULD HAVE PROCE SSED THE MATTER THROUGH REGULAR BANKING CHANNELS IS IMMATERIAL, INA SMUCH AS THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTION HAS NOT BEEN DISPUTE D BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. FURTHER, WE FIND THAT THE CASH WAS DEPOSIT ED IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE MONEY WAS THEREAFTER, ROUTE D THROUGH THE BANKING CHANNEL FOR PAYMENT TO THE GOVERNMENT FOR C ONVERTING THE LAND INTO FREE HOLD PROPERTY. FURTHER, IN THE JUDGMENT IN THE MATTER OF SMT. KUSU M DHAMANI VS. ADDL. CIT, 47 TAXMANN.COM 143, THE COORDINATE BENCH HAS HELD AS U NDER :- 9 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSE D THE RELEVANT MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. FROM THE RECORD THER E IS NO SHRED OF DOUBT ABOUT THE GENUINENESS OF THE TRANSACTIONS AND THEIR DISCLOSURE IN THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNT AND RETURNS OF BOTH THE ASSESSEE W HO HAPPEN TO BE HUSBAND AND WIFE, CARRYING ON THE BUSINESS AS SISTE R CONCERNS. SECTION 271D READ WITH SECTION 269SS WAS INTRODUCED BY THE LEGISLATURE TO DISCOURAGE THE MENACE OF BLACK MONEY. SINCE THESE T RANSACTIONS ARE GENUINE, THIS ELEMENT OF BLACK MONEY IS TOTALLY RUL ED OUT. THE ASSESSEE HAS GIVEN AN EXPLANATION IN OUR VIEW IS NOT UNREASO NABLE AND IS BASED ON BUSINESS EXIGENCIES ALSO FOR PAYMENTS TO LABOURERS AND LENDERS. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE TR ANSACTIONS BEING GENUINE AND THE ASSESSEE HAVING OFFERED REASONABLE EXPLANATION JUSTIFYING THESE CASH TRANSACTIONS, THE IMPUGNED PENALTY U/S 2 71D IS NOT LEVIABLE. OUR VIEW IS FORTIFIED BY THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE JU RISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF RAJ KUMAR SHARMA (SUPRA) AND THE JUD GEMENT OF HONBLE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SAINI ME DICAL STORE (SUPRA) WHICH IS FOLLOWED BY HONBLE P & H HIGH COURT IN TH E CASE OF SUNIL KUMAR GOEL (SUPRA). THUS IN VIEW OF THE FACTS AND CIRCUMS TANCES OF THE CASE AND THE DECISIONS RELIED ON ABOVE, THE PENALTY IS DELET ED. 6. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18/03/201 6. SD/- SD/- VH-VKJ-EHUK YFYR DQEKJ (T.R. MEENA) (LALIET KUMAR) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER TK;IQJ@ JAIPUR FNUKAD@ DATED:- 18 /03/2016. DAS/ 10 ITA NO. 999/JP/2013 ACIT VS. SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSFKR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. VIHYKFKHZ@ THE APPELLANT-THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR. 2. IZR;FKHZ@ THE RESPONDENT-SHRI AKSHAY KUMAR, JAIPUR. 3. VK;DJ VK;QDR@ CIT 4. VK;DJ VK;QDRVIHY@ THE CIT(A) 5. FOHKKXH; IZFRFUF/K] VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ@ DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. XKMZ QKBZY@ GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 999/JP/2013) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASST. REGISTRAR