COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SAINI MEDICAL STORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue has filed the present appeal under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961 (for short "the Act"), against the order of the Income -tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "B", New Delhi (for short "the Tribunal"), passed in ITA No. arises in this appeal: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in dismissing the appeal of the Revenue and confirmed the action of the CIT(A) in cancelling the penalty of Rs. 50,000 under s. 271D imposed by the Dy. CIT - initiation of penalty proceedings under s. 271D of the Act as the respondent -assessee had contravened the provisions of s. 269SS of the Act during the financial year 1992 -93 relevant to the asst. yr. 1993 -94 by accepting loan/deposits in cash from the persons as per detail given below : Sr. Name of the person Amount Total Date of No. repayment 1. Shri Puran Chand 3,000 11 -4 -1992 20,000 28,000 16 -4 -1992 5,000 27 -4 -1992

(2.) SHRI Banwari Lal 20,000 16 -4 -1992 2,000 22,000 28 -4 -1992 A show -cause notice under s. 274 r/w s. 271D of the Act was issued to the assessee. The assessee in response thereto filed written submissions and the then Dy. CIT, Hisar Range, Hisar (now Jt. CIT), imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000 which feeling aggrieved against the said order filed an appeal which was allowed by the Commissioner of Income -tax (Appeals)

(3.) SHRI Rajesh Bindal, learned counsel for the Revenue, submitted that the penalty had been rightly imposed by the Dy. CIT, Hisar Range, Hisar, and he supported the order imposing penalty. He argued that the orders of the CIT(A) and the Tribunal cancelling the penalty are perverse and, therefore, a substantial question of law as claimed by the Revenue arises in this appeal.