Reversal of input tax credit in proportion to exempt supply: specificity of show-cause notice required; order set aside, fresh proceedings allowed wit...
Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Penalty under section 271D could not be sustained because the foundational allegation of acceptance of a cash loan was not conclusively established. The Tribunal noted that the assessment based on a seized loose paper and the lender's statement had already been quashed on a legal ground, leaving no final finding that the assessee had actually availed the loan. It also found that the alleged broker's identity was not established and no enquiry was made, so the claimed contravention of section 269SS remained unproved. The penalty was therefore directed to be deleted and the appeal was allowed.
Penalty under section 271D could not be sustained because the foundational allegation of acceptance of a cash loan was not conclusively established. The Tribunal noted that the assessment based on a seized loose paper and the lender's statement had already been quashed on a legal ground, leaving no final finding that the assessee had actually availed the loan. It also found that the alleged broker's identity was not established and no enquiry was made, so the claimed contravention of section 269SS remained unproved. The penalty was therefore directed to be deleted and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
