https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68510 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the penalty imposed under section 271D of the Income Tax Act for violating section 269SS. The CIT(A) canceled the penalty, reasoning that the assessee, a contractor in a remote area, needed cash for immediate labor payments and borrowed from its sister-concern at the work site. The Tribunal agreed, noting the lack of banking facilities at remote sites during the harvesting season. It held that the transactions were not loans or deposits under section 269SS, and the penalty for a technical breach was unwarranted. en-us Wed, 27 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Feb 2017 12:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68510 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the penalty imposed under section 271D of the Income Tax Act for violating section 269SS. The CIT(A) canceled the penalty, reasoning that the assessee, a contractor in a remote area, needed cash for immediate labor payments and borrowed from its sister-concern at the work site. The Tribunal agreed, noting the lack of banking facilities at remote sites during the harvesting season. It held that the transactions were not loans or deposits under section 269SS, and the penalty for a technical breach was unwarranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 27 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68510