https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412058 Penalty under section 271D cannot be sustained merely because the assessee was convicted in cheque dishonour proceedings; income-tax proceedings require independent proof that a cash loan or deposit was actually accepted in violation of section 269SS. Where the Assessing Officer failed to make his own enquiry, did not bring cogent material on record, and did not examine the lender or allow cross-examination, reliance only on the criminal conviction was insufficient. The penalty was therefore deleted. en-us Mon, 06 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Sep 2021 15:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412058 Penalty under section 271D cannot be sustained merely because the assessee was convicted in cheque dishonour proceedings; income-tax proceedings require independent proof that a cash loan or deposit was actually accepted in violation of section 269SS. Where the Assessing Officer failed to make his own enquiry, did not bring cogent material on record, and did not examine the lender or allow cross-examination, reliance only on the criminal conviction was insufficient. The penalty was therefore deleted. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 06 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=412058