https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240069 The High Court ruled in favor of the appellant HUF in an Income Tax Appeal case, overturning the penalty imposed under Section 271-E for alleged violation of Section 269T. The Court held that the loan repayments made through share transfer did not breach Section 269T, as the transactions occurred before the amendment that extended the scope of the provision to cover loans. The Court emphasized the distinction between loans and deposits, concluding that the repayment method and nature of the transactions did not align with the requirements of Section 269T. en-us Thu, 20 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Nov 2013 00:53:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240069 The High Court ruled in favor of the appellant HUF in an Income Tax Appeal case, overturning the penalty imposed under Section 271-E for alleged violation of Section 269T. The Court held that the loan repayments made through share transfer did not breach Section 269T, as the transactions occurred before the amendment that extended the scope of the provision to cover loans. The Court emphasized the distinction between loans and deposits, concluding that the repayment method and nature of the transactions did not align with the requirements of Section 269T. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 20 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240069