R.M.Kishore, Chennai vs. JCIT Non Corporate Range 7, Chennai
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 374/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2019AY 2014-15
Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 374/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shri R.M. Kishore, The Joint Commissioner Of No. 83, Plot No. 2981, 1St Street, Vs. Income Tax, Z-Block, 13Th Main Road, Annanagar, Non Corporate Range 7, Chennai 600 040. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Ahspk2751K] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Baskar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.10.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 7, Chennai, Dated 21.12.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Ground Raised By The Assessee Is That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Penalty Of ₹.10,85,000/- Levied Under Section 271D Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short].
For Appellant: Shri G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 273B
…ous decisions. However, the assessing Officer has not accepted the explanation of the assessee and levied penalty under section 271D of the Act, which was confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 4.1 The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT v. T.R. Rangarajan in 279 ITR 587 has held that penalty under section 271D of the Act cannot be levied on the loan received from the relatives on a Sunday. Moreover, In 4 I.T.A. No. 374/Chny/19 the case of M. Yeshodha in 351 ITR 265 (Mad), the Hon’ble Madras High Court held that transaction of loan between father in law and daughter in law in cash cannot be subject matter of lev…
