https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15079 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a partnership firm, in a case involving the violation of Section 269T of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that Section 269T applies to deposits, not loans, citing precedents and interpretations. The petitioner's explanation for repaying loans in cash due to lenders lacking bank accounts was accepted by the court. Consequently, the penalty imposed by the Deputy Commissioner and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax was deemed unjustified, leading to the quashing of the order and allowing the writ petition without costs. en-us Thu, 24 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Jul 2009 15:28:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15079 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, a partnership firm, in a case involving the violation of Section 269T of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that Section 269T applies to deposits, not loans, citing precedents and interpretations. The petitioner's explanation for repaying loans in cash due to lenders lacking bank accounts was accepted by the court. Consequently, the penalty imposed by the Deputy Commissioner and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax was deemed unjustified, leading to the quashing of the order and allowing the writ petition without costs. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 24 Dec 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15079