https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118359 The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, overturning the CIT(A)'s partial confirmation of the penalty under section 271D. It concluded that transactions between closely related persons, such as father and son, fell outside the scope of section 269SS. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's explanation for cash deposits as reasonable, recognizing the temporary financial needs and confirming that the bank acted as a banker, not as the assessee's agent. The Tribunal emphasized compliance with the purpose of section 269SS, which is to ensure cash movements are tracked through banking channels, thus absolving the assessee of responsibility for the son's banking actions. en-us Fri, 07 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 20 Mar 2024 10:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118359 The Tribunal allowed the appeal by the assessee, overturning the CIT(A)'s partial confirmation of the penalty under section 271D. It concluded that transactions between closely related persons, such as father and son, fell outside the scope of section 269SS. The Tribunal accepted the assessee's explanation for cash deposits as reasonable, recognizing the temporary financial needs and confirming that the bank acted as a banker, not as the assessee's agent. The Tribunal emphasized compliance with the purpose of section 269SS, which is to ensure cash movements are tracked through banking channels, thus absolving the assessee of responsibility for the son's banking actions. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 07 Apr 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118359