2011 (2) TMI 1544

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....: 1, ORAL ORDER Honourable Mr.Justice Akil Kureshi Revenue is in appeal against judgment dated 7.11.07 of the Tribunal to the extent the same is against the Revenue. Short facts are as follows: Respondent-assessee had accepted series of loans during the relevant assessment year all exceeding Rs. 20,000/- in cash. Such loans from various sources being in cash and in excess of Rs. 20,000....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ribunal erred in drawing a distinction between two situations when facts were otherwise identical. He submitted that if the penalty for loans accepted from individual financiers was found to be opposed to section 269-SS, it is difficult to appreciate how the Tribunal deleted penalty for the loans accepted from the HUF of the partners of the assessee. He submitted that the HUF and individual partne....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the assessee had shown sufficient reasons for accepting such loans in cash. Reference was also made to the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Assistant Director of Inspection v. Km. A.B.Shanthi, 255 ITR 258 wherein the vires of statutory provisions in question were upheld relying on the provisions of section 273B giving discretion under certain circumstances not to impose penalty. We ....