https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301662 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the penalty order under Section 271D. It held the penalty was invalid due to being barred by limitation and lack of concrete evidence establishing the alleged loan transaction. The documents seized did not conclusively prove the cash loan, and the penalty was deemed based on suspicion rather than solid proof. The Tribunal found the penalty unsustainable and deleted it. en-us Wed, 03 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:07:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301662 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, quashing the penalty order under Section 271D. It held the penalty was invalid due to being barred by limitation and lack of concrete evidence establishing the alleged loan transaction. The documents seized did not conclusively prove the cash loan, and the penalty was deemed based on suspicion rather than solid proof. The Tribunal found the penalty unsustainable and deleted it. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 03 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301662