https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275219 Penalty under section 271D was held unsustainable where the same cash transaction had already been assessed as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The court reasoned that once the receipt was taxed on the footing that the explanation was unsatisfactory, the transaction could not again be used to invoke section 269SS and impose consequential penalty under section 271D on the same facts. The authorities also accepted that the cash receipts arose from cheque discounting for urgent business needs and that reasonable cause existed. Deletion of the penalty was therefore sustained in favour of the assessee. en-us Thu, 21 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Sep 2018 13:28:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275219 Penalty under section 271D was held unsustainable where the same cash transaction had already been assessed as unexplained cash credit under section 68. The court reasoned that once the receipt was taxed on the footing that the explanation was unsatisfactory, the transaction could not again be used to invoke section 269SS and impose consequential penalty under section 271D on the same facts. The authorities also accepted that the cash receipts arose from cheque discounting for urgent business needs and that reasonable cause existed. Deletion of the penalty was therefore sustained in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 21 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275219