Law:

Section:

Section 269SS, read with sections 269T, 271D, 271E and 273B, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Deposits - Mode of taking/accepting (Illustrations) - Assessment years 2008-09 to 2012-13 - It was found that assessee was taking and giving back amounts exceeding Rs. 20,000 through cash repeatedly though entire transactions took place in major city - Assessee had neither explained as to urgency, compulsion or any other important circumstances for breach - Whether since it was not a case of mere technical or venial breach, and it was a case of evading provision of Act, penalty was to be levied - Held, yes [Para 14] [In favour of revenue] CASE REVIEW CIT v. Balaji Traders [2008] 303 ITR 312/167 Taxman 27 (Mad.)(para 12) and CIT v. Sunil Kumar Goel [2009] 315 ITR 163 (Punj. & Har.)(para 13) distinguished. CASES REFERRED TO CIT v. Speedways Rubber (P.) Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 31 (Punj. & Har.) (para 5), CIT v. Rashi Injection Moulders [2014] 368 ITR 527 (Mad.) (para 5), CIT v. MAA Khodiyar Construction [2014] 365 ITR 474 (Guj) (para 5), CIT v. Lakshmi Trust Co. [2008] 303 ITR 99 (Mad.) (para 5), CIT v. Balaji Traders [2008] 303 ITR 312/167 taxman 27 (Mad.) (para 5), CIT v. Ratna Agencies [2006] 284 ITR 609 (Mad.) (para 5) and CIT v. Sunil Kumar Goel [2009] 315 ITR 163/183 Taxman 53 (Punj. & Har.) (para 5). JUDGMENT T. Raja, J.-The appellant-assessee, aggrieved by the impugned common order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal "A" Bench, Chennai, in I. T. A. Nos. 220 to 228/Mds/2014, dated May 29, 2014, for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13, respectively, has brought all these tax case appeals raising the following substantial questions of law : "(1) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in upholding the orders of the respondent in levying penalty under section 271D of the Act for accepting loan in cash in excess of Rs. 20,000 within the purview of the provisions in section 269SS of the Act for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2011-12 even though the transactions were admittedly genuine and bona fide ? (2) Whether the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in upholding the orders of the respondent in levying penalty…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492