https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423752 The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty imposed under Section 271D. It concluded that the transactions were advances for the sale of agricultural land, not loans, and thus did not contravene Section 269SS. The amendments effective from 01-06-2015 were not applicable. The Tribunal highlighted that the seized documents supported the assessee's position, and the Department failed to provide contradictory evidence. en-us Thu, 05 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jun 2022 10:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423752 The Tribunal dismissed the Department's appeal, affirming the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the penalty imposed under Section 271D. It concluded that the transactions were advances for the sale of agricultural land, not loans, and thus did not contravene Section 269SS. The amendments effective from 01-06-2015 were not applicable. The Tribunal highlighted that the seized documents supported the assessee's position, and the Department failed to provide contradictory evidence. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 05 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=423752