- (1.) THE Court: The appeal has been preferred by the revenue against a judgment and order dated 18th April, 2013 by which the learned Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revenue. The facts and circumstances of this case, briefly stated, are as follows: The assessee claimed to have received a sum of Rs. 11 lakhs in cash on account of share application money. A notice under Section 271D was issued by the assessing officer on the ground that receipt of the sum of Rs. 11 lakhs in cash was in violation of the provisions of Section 269 SSS. The assessee, however, did not appear before the assessing officer. In the circumstances, the order dated 30th April, 2010 was passed imposing penalty of Rs. 10,80,000/ -.
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the order of the assessing officer, an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the CIT(A) who passed his order dated 6th August, 2012 holding that share application money could not be treated as deposit within the meaning of provisions of Section 269 SS. Therefore, the order of the assessing officer was set aside. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the revenue on the same ground.
(3.) MR . Bharadwaj, learned advocate appearing for the assessee, submitted that the judgment in the case of Bhalotia Engg. Works Pvt. Ltd. vs. C.I.T. relied upon by the assessing officer, has no manner of application to the facts and circumstances of this case because in that case the so -called share application money was refunded. But in this case, according to him, shares were in fact issued. This fact does not appear to have been reflected in any of the three judgments, which are before us. He submitted that share application money can not be treated as a deposit. The term "deposit" has been defined in Section 269Y as also in Section 269SS.;