https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13467 The court upheld the constitutional validity of sections 269SS, 276DD, and 271D of the Income-tax Act. Following the omission of section 276DD, it was determined that only penalties, not imprisonment, could be imposed under section 271D. The accused, a cinema actress, had her 2-year rigorous imprisonment set aside but was required to pay a fine of Rs. 4,65,000 for obtaining a loan above Rs. 10,000 in violation of section 269SS. en-us Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 May 2009 11:16:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13467 The court upheld the constitutional validity of sections 269SS, 276DD, and 271D of the Income-tax Act. Following the omission of section 276DD, it was determined that only penalties, not imprisonment, could be imposed under section 271D. The accused, a cinema actress, had her 2-year rigorous imprisonment set aside but was required to pay a fine of Rs. 4,65,000 for obtaining a loan above Rs. 10,000 in violation of section 269SS. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13467