Case Details

Citation(s)
2008 SLG 985 2008 SLD 985 (2008) 296 ITR 377
Rajasthan High Court
S. B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No. 1840 OF 1995, OCTOBER 17, 2005
SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, J.
A. Kaslizval for the Petitioner. J. K. Singhi and Anuroop Singhi for the
Respondent.

Madan Lal Mahaveer Prasad

v.

Law:

Section:

Section 271E of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Penalty - For failure to comply with section 269T Where petitioner had failed to prove that repayment or deposit of Rs. 50,000 otherwise than by crossed cheque or bank draft was made by it for some reasonable cause but pleaded that it was a case of mere technical default and that genuineness of transaction was never really in dispute, levy of penalty on assessee was proper Where the petitioner had failed to prove that repayment or deposit of Rs. 50,000 otherwise that by crossed cheque or bank draft was made by it for some reasonable cause but pleaded that it was a case of mere technical default and that the genuiness of the transaction was never really in disputes. Held that as the petitioner had failed to show the reasonable cause in contravening the provisions contained in section 269-T, levy of penalty on the assessee was justified. JUDGMENT Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.-The instant petition relates to proceedings carried out for levy of penalty under section 271E of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short "1961 Act"), in respect of a default under section 269T of the 1961 Act for which the penalty of Rs. 25,000 was levied by the respondent authorities in terms of section 271E of the 1961 Act upon the petitioner-firm. The petitioner-firm seeks to quash the impugned orders dated November 19, 1993, July 12, 1994 and December 20, 1994. The contextual facts depict that the petitioner-firm had furnished a return of income for the assessment year 1990-91 with the Income-tax Officer. The Income-tax Officer processed the return under section 143(3) of the 1961 Act and except for making routine additions in respect of interest paid to partners to the tune of Rs. 4,000 from out of loss of Rs. 13,484 claimed in bardana account, and another amount of Rs. 1,000 from out of expenditure incurred for tea, coffee, etc., and for a balance-sheet difference of Rs. 87, the returned figures were accepted by him. By the same order the Income-tax Officer also granted continuation of registration in terms of section 185 of the 1961 Act. The assessment order was passed on January 30, 1991. The Income-tax Officer, however, initiated proceedings under…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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