https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784172 The dominant issue was whether penalty under s.271D for contravention of s.269SS was sustainable, or whether "reasonable cause" under s.273B was established for accepting cash sale consideration for immovable property. The Tribunal held that the assessee received cash advances and the balance consideration strictly in terms of a written sale agreement executed prior to the amendment to s.269SS effective 01.06.2015, and the sale consideration was duly disclosed with tax paid. This contractual context constituted reasonable cause within s.273B, rendering s.271D inapplicable; accordingly, the penalty was deleted and the appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 10 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2025 09:29:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784172 The dominant issue was whether penalty under s.271D for contravention of s.269SS was sustainable, or whether "reasonable cause" under s.273B was established for accepting cash sale consideration for immovable property. The Tribunal held that the assessee received cash advances and the balance consideration strictly in terms of a written sale agreement executed prior to the amendment to s.269SS effective 01.06.2015, and the sale consideration was duly disclosed with tax paid. This contractual context constituted reasonable cause within s.273B, rendering s.271D inapplicable; accordingly, the penalty was deleted and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784172