2015 (6) TMI 396 - ITAT JAIPUR
M/s Govind Kripa Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. and others Versus Joint Commissioner of Income Tax and others
Penalty U/s 271D and 271E - period of limitation - violation of conditions of conditions of section 269SS - Cash receipts - Held that - For imposition penalty U/s 271D and 271E is covered U/s 275(1)(c) of the Act. As per Section 275(1)(c) of the Act,.....
2015 (5) TMI 470 - ITAT MUMBAI
M/s. Shreepati Developer & Builder Ltd. Versus The Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax
Penalty levied under section 271D & 271E - Repayment of loan by any other mode except by way of account payee cheque/draft - transfer of amount by way of Journal entries. - Held that - In the case in hand, the transactions were carried out betwee.....
2015 (4) TMI 509 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Shri Krishnapada Chanda Versus Commissioner of Income Tax-XI
Penalty under section 271D - Tribunal confirmed penalty levy - Held that - The fact that money was withdrawn on 6th May, 1998 from the bank account of the lender and the fact that the money was deposited in the bank account of the borrower on 6th May.....
2015 (4) TMI 920 - ITAT PUNE
Shivaji R. Pawar (HUF) Versus JCIT
Penalty u/s.271D - acceptance of loan in cash - violation of the provisions of section 269SS - Held that - Respectfully following the decision of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court cited in Madhukar B. Pawar 2008 (6) TMI 321 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT we.....
2015 (3) TMI 19 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
M/s. Nandhi Dhall Mills Versus The Commissioner of Income-tax
Penalty u/s 271D - contravention of the provision under Section 269SS - whether the explanation given by the assessee has a reasonable cause to embark on such transaction, which would fall within the provisions of Section 269SS? - Held that - Though .....
2015 (2) TMI 212 - DELHI HIGH COURT
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI-VIII, NEW DELHI Versus M/s. MUTHOOT FINANCIERS, NEW DELHI
Penalty under Section 271-D - firm had accepted payments from the partners, during the relevant year corresponding to the Assessment Years, in cash - Held that - The answer to the issue which arises for our consideration has its contours in realm of .....
2015 (2) TMI 987 - ITAT DELHI
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-33 (1) , New Delhi Versus M/s. Vardaan Fashion, Shri Inderpal Singh Wadhawan
Penalty u/s 271D - violation of provisions of section 269SS - CIT(A) deleted penalty levy - Held that - The CIT(A) has clearly recorded the finding that there was the business transaction between the assessee firm and M/s Rups Craft Inc. and all the .....
2015 (2) TMI 245 - ITAT HYDERABAD
M/s. Srishti Life Needs P. Ltd., Hyderabad Versus Addl. CIT, Range-3, Hyderabad
Penalty under section 271D - book entries to share application money account - Held that - As seen from the transactions based on the ledger account, an amount of ₹ 12,95,490 was paid for the purpose of salaries and benefits every month and an .....
2015 (1) TMI 393 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I Versus BARODA EXTRUSION LTD.
Waiver of penalty u/s 273B - Penalty u/s 271D - Breach of Section 269SS - assessee had accepted cash deposits of ₹ 5,21,000/- from five parties otherwise than by account payee cheques or account payee bank drafts - Held that - Tribunal has righ.....
2015 (1) TMI 440 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) II Versus Home Developers Pvt. Ltd.
Violation of Sections 269SS and 269T - Receipt and payment of cash loan along with interest - Unexplained income - Surrender of Income - Tribunal deleted whole addition made by Assessing Officer - Held that - substantial surrender was made during the.....
2015 (2) TMI 116 - MADRAS HIGH COURT``
The Commissioner of Income Tax Chennai Versus M/s. Object Frontier Software Pvt. Ltd.
Penalty under Section 271D - whether share application money received in cash is in the nature of deposit and not in contravention to the provisions of Section 269 SS ? - Held that - In the present case the assessee was under the bona fide impression.....
2014 (12) TMI 848 - DELHI HIGH COURT
The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. Sidhartha Securities And Traders Ltd.
Deletion of penalty u/s 271D Revenue was of the view that assessee had taken unsecured loan of ₹ 8,52,71,500/- from M/s Oswal Agro Mills Ltd., otherwise than by an account payee cheque or bank draft in violation of Section 269SS Whether Section.....
2014 (12) TMI 923 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Smt. B. Madhavi, Hyderabad Versus Jt. Commissioner of Income tax
Confirmation of penalty u/s 271D Violation of section 269SS - Assessee obtained unsecured loan in cash - Since the entire loan was received in cash, AO was of the view that provisions of section 269SS have been violated thereby attracting penal provi.....
2014 (12) TMI 850 - DELHI HIGH COURT
Commissioner of Income Tax Versus M/s. National Clothing Co.
Deletion of penalty u/s 271D Whether Section 269SS is violated if there is a book entry through journal and when there is no actual payment in cash - Held that - The Tribunal rightly was of the view that penalty cannot be imposed u/s 271D on the grou.....
2015 (1) TMI 1115 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
CIT Versus M/s. SHREENATHJI CORPN
Penalty levied under Section 271D - assessee firm accepted loans/deposits of ₹ 20,000/- each from 13 parties totalling to ₹ 2,60,000/- in cash, in contravention of the provisions of Section 269SS - Held that - Looking to the facts and cir.....