2014 (3) TMI 218 - KERALA HIGH COURT
M/s. Soundarya Textiles Versus The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Contravention of section 269SS of the Act – Penalty u/s 271DD of the Act – Proper explanation not made - Held that:- There was no material to substantiate the questions raised by the appellant - The main allegation raised by the assessing officer for ......
2014 (2) TMI 1063 - ITAT DELHI
M/s NEERAJ SHOES INDUSTRIES PVT LTD Versus ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
Penalty u/s 271D of the Act - Violation of section 269SS of the Act – Mode of taking certain loans or deposits – Held that:- Without giving any reason as to why he is not following the judgement in the case of Idhayam Publications Ltd.[2006 (1) TMI ......
2014 (2) TMI 564 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax-VI Versus Madhav Enterprise Pvt. Ltd.
Advances not submitted as per section 269SS and 269T of the Act - Penalty u/s 271E of the Act – Held that:- What the respondent received from the prospective buyers was advance money simplicitor which was neither a loan nor a deposit even within the ......
2014 (1) TMI 712 - KERALA HIGH COURT
Sri. KV. George Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax
Penalty u/s 271D in respect of section 269SS - Held that:- After 30th of June, 1984 there is a mandate that no person shall accept or take loan or deposit from any person other than an account payee cheque or account payee bank draft, if such loan or ......
2013 (12) TMI 314 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Dineshchandra Shantilal Shah
Violation of section 269SS and 269T - Held that:- the assessee being a "shroff" has two lines of business cheque discounting business and money-lending business - The assessee had to discount the cheque for cash - The assessee had not taken any loan ......
2013 (10) TMI 983 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Auto Piston Mfg. Co. P. Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Income-tax
Penalty ou/s 271D - The appellant-company could not disburse the bonus due on Diwali to its workers and promised to make the payment of bonus in the first week of March, 1991. - Acceptance of cash loan in violation of section 269SS of the Income-tax ......
2013 (9) TMI 6 - ITAT DELHI
DCIT, New Delhi Versus Sahara India Commercial Corpn. Ltd.
Optionally Fully Convertible Debentures (OFCDs), whether a security or a loan & deposit – For contravention of section 269SS, penalty u/s 271D to be levied – Held that:- Relying upon the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in Sahara India Real Est ......
2013 (8) TMI 486 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Mahak Singh Versus Commissioner of Income Tax And Another
Penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act – Violation of bar provided by Section 269SS of the Act, which provides all transactions above Rs.20,000/- to be made through banking channels – Held that:- There is no evidence to show that there is u ......
2013 (8) TMI 404 - ITAT COCHIN
The Income Tax Officer Versus Shri KV. George
Penalty u/s 271D - violation of section 269SS - Reasonable Cause u/s 273B - receipt of loan by cash exceeding Rs. 20,000/- Held that:- no penalty shall be imposable on the assessee for receiving or accepting loan or deposit otherwise than by account ......
2013 (8) TMI 36 - ITAT MUMBAI
Clark Rubbers Ltd. Versus ITO 6(2) (1) Mumbai
Penalty u/s 271D - violation of the provisions of section 269SS as loan was taken otherwise than by A/c Payee cheque or A/c Payee Bank Draft - Held that:- There was a reasonable cause with the assessee company in requesting its sister concern to imme ......
2013 (7) TMI 772 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax-IV Versus Shyam Corporation
Penalty u/s 271D and 271E - Held that:- receipt for which revenue intends to invoke the provisions of section 269SS or 269T as the case may be for imposing penalty under section 271D or 271E as the case may be were during the assessment proceedings t ......
2013 (7) TMI 486 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax VI Versus Madhav Enterprise Pvt. Ltd.
Penalty u/s 271E - Advances repaid by assessee - Contravention of Section 269T - Whether the Appellate Tribunal has substantially erred in holding that advances against the booking of shops and offices is not deposit within the meaning of section 269 ......
2013 (6) TMI 309 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax. Bathinda Versus Shri Inderjit Sharma
Penalty u/s 271D - contravention of section 269SS - leniency provided in the 2nd proviso to Section 269SS - agriculturists - held that:- A perusal to second proviso to Section 269SS of the Act shows that where the person from whom the loan or deposit ......
2013 (4) TMI 113 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV Versus HARIVADAN BHATT
Deleting the penalty imposed under Sections 271-D and 271-E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Violation of provision of Section 269-SS of the Act - Held that:- It was pointed out that it has been established from the materials on record that the amounts ......
2013 (3) TMI 265 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
The Commissioner of Income Tax-I Versus V. Siva Kumar
Penalty u/s 271D - advance has been accounted as loan and interest debited - assessee was a partner in four firms and Proprietor in Reliance Realtors - ITAT deleted the levy of penalty - Held that:- Referring to Commissioner of Income Tax v. R.M.Chda ......