AO can’t levy penalty in absence of jurisdictional fact that assessee accepted cash loan from wife: ITAT

  • Blog|News|Income Tax|
  • 2 Min Read
  • By Taxmann
  • |
  • Last Updated on 28 March, 2023

Penalty u/s 271D

Case Details: ITO v. Sudhir Kumar Rawat - [2023] 148 taxmann.com 155 (Jabalpur-Trib.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

    • Sanjay Arora, Accountant Member & Manomohan Das, Judicial Member
    • Sapan Usrethe, Adv. & Apoorva Agrawal, CA for the Appellant.
    • Ravi Mehrotra, Sr. DR for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

Assessee, an individual, was show-caused for levy of penalty for violation of Section 269SS for receiving around Rs. 15 Lakhs in cash from his wife. In response, the assessee replied that his wife sold a property during the relevant assessment year, and the buyer deposited the purchase consideration in his account. This money was then returned to her by the assessee as the same belonged to her.

Further, the assessee demonstrated that he and his wife maintained books of accounts and that the corresponding debit and credit transactions in the books of accounts were not in relation to any loan or deposit of money. However, contending it as a violation of Section 269SS, the Assessing Officer (AO) levied a penalty under section 271D.

On appeal, CIT(A) cancelled the penalty order, and the matter then reached the Jabalpur Tribunal.

ITAT Held

The Tribunal held that the entire payment was only in satisfaction of the amount standing to the credit of the assessee’s wife, who was only receiving back her money from the assessee. It may attract penalty under section 271E for contravention of section 269T, but there was no question of contravention of section 269SS.

The penalty levied under section 271D was unsustainable in law due to the absence of jurisdictional fact i.e., the acceptance of money in cash by the assessee from his wife. The ledger accounts of the assessee and his wife reveal that the assessee had paid that amount in cash to his wife, and, further, it was the only cash transaction between the two.

Incorrectly mentioning a section of law does not necessarily invalidate the judicial action if the authority has the power to take such action. However, if the incorrect section was mentioned and the underlying facts do not support the intended action, then the action is invalid.

For instance, if an assessee received cash from their spouse, which should attract a penalty under section 271D, but the authority mentioned section 271E incorrectly, the action would still be valid as long as the facts support the intended action.

Accordingly, the penalty under section 271D cannot be imposed without the proper jurisdiction. However, the AO was at liberty to initiate penalty under section 271E.

List of Cases Reviewed

List of Cases Referred to

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com

Author: Taxmann

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.

The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:

  • The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
  • All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
  • Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
  • Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
  • All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
  • The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
  • Font and size that's easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied