TMI Blog2006 (1) TMI 97X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the current account could not be considered as a loan or advance. - we are of the view that since transaction does not fall within the meaning of loan or advance, there is no violation of section 269SS of the Income-tax Act. We find no error in the order of the Tribunal and the same requires no interference. Hence, no substantial question of law arises for consideration of this court - - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ooks. The relevant assessment year is 1992-93. In the assessment proceeding, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee had accepted a cash loan of Rs. 2,94,000 from M/s. Manian Creations, a sister concern, in violation of the provisions of section 269SS of the Act. With the above information, the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax initiated penal proceedings under section 271D and issued a show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 271D, he has referred the Madras High Court judgment in the case of Kumari A.B. Shanthi (alias) Vennira Adai Nirmala v. Assistant Director of Inspection, Investigation reported in [1992] 197 ITR 330, which declared that section 269SS is unconstitutional. Aggrieved by that order, the Revenue filed an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and contended that the Supreme Court (Asst. D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of Mr. S.V.S. Manian. Mr. S.V.S. Manian used to pay the money in the current account and used to withdraw the money also from the current account. The Revenue should establish that what was received by the assessee is a loan or deposit within the meaning of section 269SS. The deposit and the withdrawal of the money from the current account could not be considered as a loan or advance. Further it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
