Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2011 (3) TMI 1347 - AT - Income Tax

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Partnership firm penalty overturned for cash loans under Income-tax Act; financial crisis cited. Clarification on 'loan' vs. 'deposit.' The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on a partnership firm for accepting cash loans in violation of Section 269SS of the Income-tax Act. It found ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Partnership firm penalty overturned for cash loans under Income-tax Act; financial crisis cited. Clarification on "loan" vs. "deposit."

                            The Tribunal set aside the penalty imposed on a partnership firm for accepting cash loans in violation of Section 269SS of the Income-tax Act. It found that the firm had reasonable cause due to financial crisis and partner's arrest, and the transactions did not involve unaccounted money. The Tribunal clarified the interpretation of "loan" and "deposit" under Section 269SS, emphasizing that temporary advances from employees may not fall within its scope. The Tribunal referred to relevant judicial precedents on penalty computation, ultimately allowing the appeal for statistical purposes and remanding the issue for fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Confirmation of penalty under Section 271D for violation of Section 269SS.
                            2. Reasonable cause for accepting cash loans.
                            3. Interpretation of "loan" and "deposit" under Section 269SS.
                            4. Applicability of judicial precedents on penalty computation under Section 271D.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Confirmation of Penalty under Section 271D for Violation of Section 269SS:
                            The primary issue in this appeal is the confirmation of a penalty amounting to Rs. 31,56,490 by the CIT(A) for the assessee's violation of Section 269SS of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The assessee, a partnership firm engaged in the transport business, accepted temporary loans totaling Rs. 39,28,236 in cash from 82 persons, which included employees and hamalis. The Assessing Officer (AO) considered Rs. 7,71,746 of these loans as unexplained and initiated penalty proceedings for accepting cash loans in contravention of Section 269SS.

                            2. Reasonable Cause for Accepting Cash Loans:
                            The assessee argued that due to severe financial crisis and the arrest of one of its partners, Sri R. Venkateswara Rao, who was also a director of a co-operative bank, it faced rumors of closure and pressure from creditors. Consequently, employees and hamalis provided petty cash loans to keep the firm operational. The assessee contended that these circumstances constituted a reasonable cause under Section 273B, which should exempt them from the penalty. The AO, however, rejected this explanation, stating that banking facilities were available, and other partners could have managed the business.

                            3. Interpretation of "Loan" and "Deposit" under Section 269SS:
                            The assessee contended that the amounts received from employees should not be considered as loans under Section 269SS. The Tribunal, however, clarified that the terms "loan" and "deposit" are not mutually exclusive and include any money received, regardless of the source. The Tribunal noted that these transactions did not fall within the mischief sought to be remedied by Section 269SS, as the amounts were genuine and did not represent unaccounted money.

                            4. Applicability of Judicial Precedents on Penalty Computation under Section 271D:
                            The assessee relied on the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v. Ajanta Dyeing & Printing Mills, which held that penalty under Section 271D should be computed only on the amount exceeding Rs. 20,000. The Tribunal, however, referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Asstt. Director of Inspection (Investigation) v. Kumari A.B. Shanthi, which clarified that penalty is leviable if the aggregate amount of cash loan or deposit is Rs. 20,000 or more. Consequently, the Tribunal did not apply the Rajasthan High Court's ratio to the present case.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's argument regarding the existence of reasonable cause due to the financial crisis and the arrest of a partner. It emphasized that the objective of Section 269SS is to curb false entries and unaccounted money, which was not the case here. The Tribunal also noted that temporary advances from employees, without stipulation for repayment or interest, could be considered outside the purview of Section 269SS. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the issue to the AO for fresh consideration, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found