https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419980 Section 69D applies only where an actual borrowing or repayment on a hundi during the relevant previous year is proved. The seized receipts, being undated and supported by an unsigned promissory note, did not establish a genuine hundi transaction, and the amount had already been taxed in another person's hands; the quantum addition was therefore unsustainable. Penalty under section 271D also failed because it was based on the same unproved cash loan allegation, and once the underlying borrowing was not established, the penalty could not survive. The relief granted to the assessee was sustained. en-us Tue, 08 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Mar 2022 15:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419980 Section 69D applies only where an actual borrowing or repayment on a hundi during the relevant previous year is proved. The seized receipts, being undated and supported by an unsigned promissory note, did not establish a genuine hundi transaction, and the amount had already been taxed in another person's hands; the quantum addition was therefore unsustainable. Penalty under section 271D also failed because it was based on the same unproved cash loan allegation, and once the underlying borrowing was not established, the penalty could not survive. The relief granted to the assessee was sustained. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 08 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419980