https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783978 Whether penalty under s. 271D for alleged violation of s. 269SS could be sustained where cash received under an agreement to sell was deposited in bank but the AO accepted the source and genuineness in assessment. Relying on SC authority that if the veracity of a cash deposit is in doubt the proper course is addition under s. 68, the Tribunal held that, absent any such doubt or s. 68 addition, ss. 269SS/269T were inapplicable on these facts; consequently, penalty under s. 271D (and allied s. 271E) could not be levied. Appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Dec 2025 07:18:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783978 Whether penalty under s. 271D for alleged violation of s. 269SS could be sustained where cash received under an agreement to sell was deposited in bank but the AO accepted the source and genuineness in assessment. Relying on SC authority that if the veracity of a cash deposit is in doubt the proper course is addition under s. 68, the Tribunal held that, absent any such doubt or s. 68 addition, ss. 269SS/269T were inapplicable on these facts; consequently, penalty under s. 271D (and allied s. 271E) could not be levied. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 23 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783978