Sec 269ss

This query is : Resolved

Querist : Anonymous

Querist : Anonymous (Querist)

20 September 2011 Sir, can any one give me some case laws in support of the assessee, in whose books some amount is credited as cash, penalty u/s271e is ordered

Regards

C A S.S.Agarwal, M.Com.,LL.B,

C A S.S.Agarwal, M.Com.,LL.B, (Expert)
Follow

23 September 2011
2011 - TMI - 205319 - ITAT, PUNE

Shramjivi Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit Versus Addl. CIT

Dated: 08-06-2011

Penalty - In the letter dt. 25th March 2004, the CBDT has advised that penalties u/s. 271-D and 271-E for violation of the provisions of Section 269-SS and 269-T, respectively, should not be indiscriminately imposed - it remained the allegation of th......

2
2010 - TMI - 202246 - Chhattisgarh High Court

Commissioner of Income-tax Versus. Preeti Fuels and Flames P. Ltd.

Dated: 25-11-2010

Penalty – Acceptance of deposit in cash – deposit by directors of company – Finding that transaction genuine and default technical – Part of amount received through banking channels from directors and promoters not in violation of section 269SS – Pen......

3
2010 - TMI - 205770 - ITAT, Kolkata

DCIT Versus Rupen Das

Dated: 12-11-2010

Acceptance of loan in cash - Penalty u/s 271D - Contravention of the provisions of section 269SS - Since, the Assessing Officer imposed penalty of Rs. 7,00,000 on the assessee u/s 271D of the Act on the ground that the assessee had contravened the pr......

4
2010 - TMI - 201555 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Sh. Surendra Singh Khurana, Prop. M/s Jai Bharat Motor Transport Col

Dated: 05-10-2010

Acceptance of loan in cash - amount has been found deposited in cash in the books of account - assessing authority was of the view that section 269 SS of the Act was flouted - penalty under section 271D of the Act has been levied to the extent - Asse......

5
2010 - TMI - 204543 - ITAT, KOLKATA

Income-tax Officer, Wd-7(1) Versus Avadh Rubber Ltd.

Dated: 28-05-2010

Penalty u/s 271D - Treatment of share application money as Deposit - The object of introducing section 269SS is to ensure that a taxpayer is not allowed to give false explanation for his unaccounted money, or if he makes some false entries, he shal......

6
2010 - TMI - 205768 - ITAT HYDERABAD

The Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Versus Addl. CIT

Dated: 26-02-2010

Application of Section 269SS or 269T to the co-operative society - Penalty for contravention - reasonable cause - assessee is a multi state Co-operative Society engaged in the activity of accepting deposits from its members and redeploying the funds ......

7
2009 - TMI - 204512 - ITAT AHMEDABAD-A

Bhikhabhai Dhanjibhai Patel. Versus Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax.

Dated: 20-11-2009

Penalties under s. 271D and s. 271E - The AO initiated penalty proceedings under s. 271D on the ground that there was a contravention of s. 269SS of the Act in as much as the assessee took a loan in cash in a sum exceeding Rs. 20,000 - The assessee w......

8
2009 - TMI - 77679 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

Commissioner of Income-tax Versus Speedways Rubber Pvt. Limited

Dated: 22-10-2009

Penalty- Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case (having violated the provision of section 269SS of the Act) the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in deleting the penalty imposed under section 271D of the Income-tax Act......

9
2009 - TMI - 34951 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX AND ANOTHER Versus KAILASH CHANDRA DEEPAK KUMAR

Dated: 16-07-2009

Advance – amount received otherwise than by way of account payee cheque or bank draft – held that - assessing authority had added Rs. 1,00,000 which is the same amount as unexplained cash credit under section 68 of the Act and the Commissioner of Inc......

10
2008 - TMI - 65926 - ITAT HYDERABAD

Hamarashehar Company P. Limited. Versus Additional Commissioner Of Income-Tax.

Dated: 12-09-2008

Penalty ......

11
2008 - TMI - 75290 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus MADHUKAR B. PAWAR

Dated: 25-06-2008

Penalty under section 271D on ground that loan in cash exceeding prescribed limit - The assessee had taken from seven persons a loan of Rs. 20,000 each. This is a finding of fact and not in dispute - Central Board of Direct Taxes vide Circular No. 57......

Querist : Anonymous

Querist : Anonymous (Querist)

23 September 2011 Thank you sie