M/S. ARUN PULVARISING INDUSTRIES,PRATAPGARH vs. ADDL. CIT, CHITTORGARH.

ITA 430/JODH/2018Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur14 August 2023AY 2011-127 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that there was a reasonable cause for the cash payment due to a public holiday, end of the financial year rush at banks, and the urgent need for funds for land purchase. Following the jurisdictional High Court's decision, the penalty was directed to be deleted.

What were the facts?

The assessee firm paid Rs. 3,90,000/- in cash to Arun Kumar Gandhi (HUF) on 30.04.2010 for the purchase of land. The Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271E, considering it a repayment of loan in cash.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271E is leviable when there is a reasonable cause for a cash transaction, and if the transaction was a loan repayment or a current account transaction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271E,Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR

Before: SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE & DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE

For Appellant: Shri Abhinav
For Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Nair, JCIT-DR
Hearing: 11.08.2023Pronounced: 14.08.2023

PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM: This is an appeal filed by the Assessee directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Udaipur dated 28th June, 2018 emanating from the penalty order under section 271E of the Act for assessment year 2011-12. The assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:- “01. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case learned Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax and CIT(A), Udaipur erred in facts as well as in law confirming the penalty u/s. 271E of Rs. 3,90,000/- on the assessee firm without considering the M/s Arun Pulvarising Industries

item of payment and assumed payment made to HUF (Arun Kumar Gandhi) as repayment of loan.

02.

Learned CIT(A

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271E

All 968 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271E →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →