฀฀฀฀ ฀฀฀฀฀฀ ฀฀฀฀฀฀, ฀฀฀฀฀฀฀฀ ฀฀฀

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘B’ Bench, Hyderabad BEFORE SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अपी.सं /ITA No.525/Hyd/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2019-20)

฀฀฀฀/ORDER PER MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA, A.M:

This appeal is filed by Shri Ahmed Bin Amer Bilwail, Hyderabad (“the assessee”), feeling aggrieved by the order passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi-42 (“Ld. CIT(A)”), dated

23.08.2022 for the A.Y. 2019-20.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee sold three plots to three different buyers on 16/05/2018 for cash at the rate of Rs. 6,68,000/- each through Sri Sultan Abdullah Bin Ali AI Kesari, a power of attorney holder (“POA”). When these facts were came to the notice of the Learned Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (Ld. Addl.CIT”), he levied penalty u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act,1961(“ the Act”), due to contravention of Section 269SS of the Act vide his order dated 26/06/2019.

3. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. Addl.CIT, the assessee filed appeal before Ld. CIT(A), who affirming the decision of the Ld. Addl. CIT dismissed the appeal of the assessee.

4. Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. The solitary ground raised by the Ld. AR in this appeal is with regards to the levy of penalty u/s. 271D of the Act. The Ld. AR submitted that the total cash of Rs. 25,86,000/- had been received by POA of the assessee against sale of 3 plots. He further submitted that, the said cash had been received by the POA at the time of registration of the plots before the Registrar. He also submitted that, if the cash is received at the time of registration of the plots before the Registrar, the provisions of section 269SS are not violated. Therefore the penalty u/s.271D is not leviable in such cases. In support of his argument he relied on the decision of co-ordinate bench of ITAT, Hyderabad in the case of Sri Shaikh Jafar, Kurnool, ITA No. 484/Hyd/2024 dated 16/07/2024 and Katasani Thirupal Reddy, ITA No.372/Hyd/2023 dated 05/07/2024. Relying on the said decisions of coordinate bench of ITAT(Supra), the Ld. AR prayed before the bench to delete the penalty u/s 271D of the Act levied by the Ld. Addl.CIT.

5. Per Contra Ld. DR relied on the orders of revenue authorities and prayed before the bench to uphold the penalty u/s 271D levied by the Ld. Addl.CIT.

6. We have heard the rival contention and also gone through the records in the light of the submissions made by the either side. There is no dispute about the facts that the total cash of Rs. 25,86,000/- had been received by POA of the assessee against sale of 3 plots. As per the contention of Ld.AR, as the said cash had been received by the POA at the time of registration of the plots before the Registrar, the provisions of section 269SS are not violated. Therefore the penalty u/s 271D is not leviable in such cases, as per the findings of the of co-ordinate bench of ITAT, Hyderabad in the case of Sri Shaikh Jafar Kurnool(Supra) and Katasani Thirupal Reddy(Supra). The Ld. AR also submitted the copy of the registered sale deed of one plot. On going through said registered sale deed, we observed that although the registered sale deed had been registered on 16/05/2018, it was executed on 02/05/2018 as per page no. 1 of the said registered sale deed. Furter at para No. 4 & 5 at page No. 2 of the said registered sale deed, it has been mentioned that the vendor has already received the sale consideration from the purchaser. The relevant page Nos. 1 &