1999 (12) TMI 50

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Income-tax Act, 1961, the assessee seeks reference of the following questions for consideration of this court: "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was not justified in confirming the penalty of Rs. 92,000 under section 271D of the Income-tax Act? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e months of February and March, 1989, in violation of the provisions of section 269SS of the Income-tax Act. Penalty of an equal amount was levied under section 271D by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax. It is not in dispute that penalty could be levied only if reasonable cause is not established. Against the order of the Deputy Commissioner levying penalty, the petitioner preferred appeal to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stances warranting the cash payments, "such as absence of banking facilities at the place of payment, payments having taken place after the banking hours or on bank holidays, etc." have been made out by the assessee. That is the only reason assigned by the Tribunal in upholding the levy of penalty. It is also interesting to note that the Tribunal observed that the reasoning given by the Commission .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X