https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426699 The tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal on the limitation issue and upheld the penalty for the Rs. 15 Lakhs loan from Mr. Mahispatsinh. However, it allowed the appeal regarding the Rs. 22.50 Lakhs received from the wife and father, stating that such transactions do not fall under Section 269SS provisions. The tribunal found the arguments related to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, consideration on merits, interpretation of the law, and distinguishing case laws to be general and did not require specific adjudication. The appeal was partly allowed. en-us Tue, 31 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Aug 2022 18:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426699 The tribunal dismissed the assessee's appeal on the limitation issue and upheld the penalty for the Rs. 15 Lakhs loan from Mr. Mahispatsinh. However, it allowed the appeal regarding the Rs. 22.50 Lakhs received from the wife and father, stating that such transactions do not fall under Section 269SS provisions. The tribunal found the arguments related to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer, consideration on merits, interpretation of the law, and distinguishing case laws to be general and did not require specific adjudication. The appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426699