Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee made repayment of loans/deposits exceeding the prescribed limit through journal entries instead of a banking channel. This led to a penalty order under Section 271E of the Income Tax Act, which was upheld by the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal held that while the repayment through journal entries contravened Section 269T, the assessee had shown a reasonable cause under Section 273B for not adhering to the prescribed modes of repayment, thus no penalty was leviable.
Key Issues
Whether a reasonable cause existed for non-compliance with Section 269T, thereby negating the penalty under Section 271E.
Sections Cited
250, 271E, 143(3), 269T, 143(3A), 143(3B), 274, 273B, 269SS, 271D
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH, KOLKATA
Before: SRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY & SRI RAKESH MISHRA
order
: 16-July-2025 ORDER
PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as Ld. 'CIT(A)'] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for AY 2018-19 dated 10.08.2024, which has been passed against the penalty order u/s 271E of the Act, dated 30.12.2022.