Section 269SS Restricting Cash Transaction not applicable to Capital contributed by Partner in Partnership Firm: ITAT [Read Order]

In ITO vs. M/s. Dayamayee Marble & Granite, the Kolkata Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) cancelling the penalty held that the capital contributed in Cash Transaction by the partner in the partnership firm does not tantamount to loan or deposit within the meaning of section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

The assessee, a partnership firm, is engaged in the business of trading in marbles and granites. The assessee had received an amount of Rs.12 lacs in cash from its partner towards capital contribution the said partner in the assessee firm. The Assessing Officer (A.O) observed that as the capital contribution received by the firm from the partner was equivalent to loan or deposit and as the receipts were in the nature of cash, it violated the provisions of section 269SS of the Act. The A.O levied penalty u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

On appeal, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) observed that introduction of capital contributed by the partner in the partnership firm does not fall under the ambit of loan or deposit within the meaning of section 269SS of the Income Tax Act,1961. He further observed that the partner had duly reflected this introduction of capital of Rs.12,00,000/- in the partnership firm in his individual balance sheet. The CIT(A) also noted that the assessee firm also had treated the receipt of Rs.12,00,000/- from the partner as capital introduced by the said partner. Accordingly, he deleted the penalty levied u/s 271D of the Act. Aggrieved, Revenue appealed before the ITAT.

Dismissing the appeal, the Bench comprising of Judicial Member A.T. Varkey and Accountant Member M. Balaganesh observed “We find that the capital contributed by the partner in the partnership firm does not tantamount to loan or deposit within the meaning of section 269SS of the Act and accordingly we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) cancelling the penalty levied thereon. Hence, we do not deem it fit to interfere in the order of the ld. CIT(A).”