https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61000 The Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority's decision to quash the penalty of Rs. 60,000 imposed on the respondent-assessee for violating section 269SS by accepting a cash loan. It concluded that the procedural irregularities did not warrant annulment of the penalty order, citing the principle that such irregularities are curable. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty provisions should be reserved for deliberate or contumacious defaults, ultimately dismissing the revenue's appeal. en-us Mon, 09 Dec 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Jan 2011 13:16:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61000 The Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority's decision to quash the penalty of Rs. 60,000 imposed on the respondent-assessee for violating section 269SS by accepting a cash loan. It concluded that the procedural irregularities did not warrant annulment of the penalty order, citing the principle that such irregularities are curable. The Tribunal emphasized that penalty provisions should be reserved for deliberate or contumacious defaults, ultimately dismissing the revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 09 Dec 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61000