<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (1) TMI 1273 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283695</link>
    <description>The appeal was allowed, and the penalty under section 271B of the I.T. Act imposed on the assessee for accepting interest-free loans exceeding specified limits from family members was revoked. The Tribunal held that the loans were not conventional loans but adjustments between family members to clear obligations to external parties, constituting a &quot;reasonable cause&quot; under section 273B. Citing relevant judgments, it was established that penalties under sections 271D and 271E should not apply to family transactions without tax implications, aimed at business exigencies, as the intention of the provisions was to combat black money transactions, not minor breaches.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Oct 2019 18:10:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=589994" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 1273 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283695</link>
      <description>The appeal was allowed, and the penalty under section 271B of the I.T. Act imposed on the assessee for accepting interest-free loans exceeding specified limits from family members was revoked. The Tribunal held that the loans were not conventional loans but adjustments between family members to clear obligations to external parties, constituting a &quot;reasonable cause&quot; under section 273B. Citing relevant judgments, it was established that penalties under sections 271D and 271E should not apply to family transactions without tax implications, aimed at business exigencies, as the intention of the provisions was to combat black money transactions, not minor breaches.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283695</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>