NARESHKUMAR R. SAHU,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3), RAJKOT

ITA 99/RJT/2018Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 May 2019AY 2013-145 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal held that the disallowance of excess interest was justified due to lack of commercial expediency. However, the penalty for accepting cash from the wife was set aside, considering it a technical breach with bonafide intentions.

What were the facts?

The assessee paid interest at 15% on loans from relatives while simultaneously lending money at 12%. The Assessing Officer disallowed the excess interest. Separately, a penalty was imposed for accepting a cash deposit of Rs. 50,000 from the assessee's wife.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance of interest paid on loans from relatives at a higher rate than lent out is justified, and whether a penalty under Section 271D is leviable for accepting a cash deposit from a spouse.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 271D,Section 269SS

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT

Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Respondent: Shri Praveen Verma, Sr.DR
Hearing: 10/05/2019

PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM :

The captioned appeals have been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the separate orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-1, Rajkot [CIT(A) in short] dated 01/02/2018 in the ITA Nos.99 & 100/RJT/2018 Asst.Year – 2013-14 matter of assessment order und

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271D

All 1,725 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271D →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →