TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 321X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clarified that if loan or deposit are in excess of Rs. 20,000 it would attract section 271D - provisions of section 269SS are not applicable - Considering the circular issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes and the loan being not in excess of Ps. 20,000 from each person and the interpretation given by the Tribunal to the said circular, the question of law does not arise – It is now well settl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding to the learned counsel, if a person takes any loan in excess of Rs. 20,000 other than by cheque that would result in breaching the provisions of section 269SS and, consequently, penalty could be levied under section 271D of the Income-tax Act. 2. From this, the question of law as framed reads as under: "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case in law, the penalty did not urge i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions of section 269SS, i.e., for taking or accepting any loan or deposit in excess of Rs. 20,000 otherwise than by an account payee cheque or bank draft. Penalty under section 271E may be levied for failure to comply with the provisions of section 269T relating to repayment by a company, including a banking company, a co-operative society or a firm, of deposits, including interest, exceeding Rs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the following judgments of the Supreme Court. In Navnit Lal C. Javeri v. K. K. Sen, AAC [1965] 56 ITR 198, 203, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court observed "It is clear that a cir r of the kind which was issued by the Board would be binding on all Offiers and persons employed in the execution of the Act under section 5(8) of the Act." Navnit Lal C. Javeri [1965] 56 ITR198 was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry power under section 119 to tone down the rigour of the law for the benefit of the assessees by issuing circulars to ensure a proper administration of the fiscal statute. In CST v. indra Industries [2001] 248 ITR 338, the court further observed that the taxing authority cannot be heard to advance an argument that it is contrary to that interpretation. 5. Considering the circular issued by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
