https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194565 The tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal seeking to increase the penalty under Section 271D from Rs. 9,00,000 to Rs. 19,00,000 due to the tax demand being only Rs. 10.00 lacs, falling below the threshold for appeals set by a CBDT circular. Additionally, the tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, overturning the penalty of Rs. 9,00,000 imposed under Section 271D for receiving advances, considering the amounts as gifts and advances due to financial distress, ultimately deleting the penalty due to the unique circumstances and absence of tax evasion intent. en-us Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 Sep 2017 20:58:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194565 The tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal seeking to increase the penalty under Section 271D from Rs. 9,00,000 to Rs. 19,00,000 due to the tax demand being only Rs. 10.00 lacs, falling below the threshold for appeals set by a CBDT circular. Additionally, the tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, overturning the penalty of Rs. 9,00,000 imposed under Section 271D for receiving advances, considering the amounts as gifts and advances due to financial distress, ultimately deleting the penalty due to the unique circumstances and absence of tax evasion intent. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194565