AMRIT BREEDER FARMS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE-11(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Present for: Appellant by : Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT Date of Hearing : 28.12.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29.12.2022 O R D E R

PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

by the assessee are reproduced as under: “1. For that the orders passed by the lower authorities are arbitrary, erroneous, without proper reasons, invalid and bad-in-law, to the extent to which they are prejudicial to the interests of the appellant.

2. For that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the order of the Joint Commissioner levying penalty of Rs.2,04,000/- u/s 271 DA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on alleged grounds.

3. For that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not properly appreciating the facts of the case and consequently in confirming the order of JCIT on alleged grounds.

4. For that the Ld. CIT (A) ought to have held that the appellant has good and sufficient reasons for the alleged contravention and penalty was not leviable.

5. For that the Ld. CIT (A) erred in not accepting the appellant's submission and explanation with regard to deposit of cash directly by the party in the Bank account of the appellant and ought not to have confirmed the penalty levied.

6. For that the appellant having submitted cogent, relevant & acceptable explanation & reasoning which the Ld. CIT (A) ought to have referred to & ought not to have confirmed the penalty levied u/s 271DA of the Act.”

3. Briefly stated facts are that assessee submitted the return of income for the AY 2019-20 on 12.09.2019 declaring therein total income of Rs.1,29,07,990/-. Assessee is carrying on the business of breeding farm, hatchery, captive feed mills etc. As required under the provision of Sec. 44AB, assessee obtained the Tax Audit Report and submitted the same. In the Tax Audit Report, the Auditor has mentioned about the cash of Rs.2,04,000/- deposited on 04.07.2018 in the assessee's Bank A/c bearing No. 40160101059286 at the branch of the Union Bank of India at Katlicherra Branch in the State of Assam. The assessee maintains Bank A/c with Union Bank of India, Camac Street Branch, Kolkata bearing A/c No. 401601010519286. The Auditor during the course of audit process found that M/s Choudhary Poultry Feed Centre had deposited an amount of Rs.2,04,000/- in cash on 04.07.2018 which contravenes the 3 Amrit Breeder Farms Pvt. Ltd., AY 2019-20 provisions of Sec.269ST of the Act and reported the same in column No.31 of the Tax Audit Report. 3.1. Based upon the information provided in the Tax Audit Report, the Joint/Additional Commissioner of Income Tax issued a notice u/s. 271DA of the Act requiring the assessee to show cause as to why the penalty should not be imposed for such contravention of provisions of Sec.269ST. The assessee upon receipt of the show cause notice submitted a reply extracts of which are as under: - “This refers to the notice issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271DA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 23.03.2021 requiring the assessee to show cause as to why an order should not be made in respect of contravention of Sec. 269ST of the Act for receiving cash in excess of Rs.2,00,000/- from Chaudhury Poultry Feed Centre as per SFT filed in terms of provision of Sec. 285BA of the Act. In this connection, it is submitted that the said party namely M/s. Chaudhury Poultry Feed Centre deposited an amount of Rs.2,04,000/- in cash on 04.07.2018 in the company's Bank A/c bearing No.40160101059286 maintained with Union Bank of India, Camac Street Branch, Kolkata. The cash was deposited at Katlicherra Branch in the State of Assam of the Bank namely Union Bank of India. In fact, we have not received any amount in cash and it has been a direct deposit by the said party in our Bank A/c. In view of the aforesaid, it is submitted that the cash having not been accepted by us and having been deposited by the said party directly in our Bank A/c in that eventuality it cannot be said that we have contravene the provisions of Sec. 269ST of the Act. In the aforesaid circumstances, we request your Honour to kindly drop the penalty proceeding initiated u/s 271DA of the Act and for which we shall be highly obliged.” 3.2. The Ld. Joint Commissioner being not satisfied with the explanation submitted by the assessee proceeded to levy penalty of Rs.2,04,000/- u/s. 271DA of the Act. He did not accept the assessee 's contention that the client could have deposited the cash directly into the account of the assessee. He ignored the basic submission that the deposit of cash has been made directly into the account of the assessee.

4 Amrit Breeder Farms Pvt. Ltd., AY 2019-20 3.3. Being aggrieved with the action of the Ld. AO, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who confirmed the action of the AO. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.