https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185575 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the Department's appeal against the deletion of the penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act. It was found that the assessee had provided a valid explanation for accepting cash loans, citing urgent circumstances, and demonstrating a reasonable cause for non-compliance with sections 269SS and 271D. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty imposition requires proof of a lack of reasonable cause, and in this case, the transaction was deemed genuine and bonafide. Consequently, the penalty under section 271D was deleted, emphasizing the importance of establishing a reasonable cause to avoid penalties under the Income Tax Act. en-us Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Aug 2016 07:45:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185575 The Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and dismissed the Department's appeal against the deletion of the penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act. It was found that the assessee had provided a valid explanation for accepting cash loans, citing urgent circumstances, and demonstrating a reasonable cause for non-compliance with sections 269SS and 271D. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty imposition requires proof of a lack of reasonable cause, and in this case, the transaction was deemed genuine and bonafide. Consequently, the penalty under section 271D was deleted, emphasizing the importance of establishing a reasonable cause to avoid penalties under the Income Tax Act. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185575