Case Law Details
CIT Vs Shri. T. Perumal (Madras High Court)
Here is a case where the loan taken from friends and repayment of the same in cash. The reason that taking of loan is found to be genuine and the same is for business exigency, it is not a case of undisclosed income. If the assessee had not given a reasonable cause, then certainly the initiation of proceedings for violation of 269SS and 269T would be justified. We find in the present case the reasonable cause for not levying penalty exists and the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assesse’s appeal. On facts, the Tribunal has clearly held in the quantum appeal there was a bona fide on the part of the assessee and as a consequence finding reasonable cause, thought it fit to delete the entire penalty.
We find no ground to interfere with the order of the Tribunal. The assessee has shown the receipt of cash and repayment of the same due to business exigency and that would amount to reasonable cause. The genuineness of the transaction to meet the immediate necessity was accepted by the Tribunal in the quantum appeal and that would amount to reasonable cause in terms of Section 273B of the Income Tax Act. Hence, we find no question of law much less any substantial question of law arises for consideration in the above appeals.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGMENT
The above Tax Case (Appeals) are filed by the Revenue as against the orders of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal raising the following substantial questions of law:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
