Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

No Penalty for cash loan accepted out of business exigencies

Case Law Details

TaxGuru Citation
2006 taxguru.in 9
Case Name
The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Vignesh Flat Housing Promoters (ITAT Chennai)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Advertisement


It was observed by the Tribunal that ‘in the instant case the undisclosed income as declared in the block return remained the assessed income. The Revenue did not doubt the veracity of the creditors. The AO did accept the credits as genuine. Most of the creditors were agriculturists, residing in remote villages and many of them did not have any bank account. The assessee was not professionally managed. From this it could be concluded that the breach flowered from a bona fide belief. Ex facie it was a venial breach. Cash was accepted because of business exigencies. As such, there existed reasonable cause for accepting the cash loans.’

Explore a landmark Income Tax Appellate Tribunal case from Chennai where a penalty under Section 271D of the Income-tax Act was successfully deleted. The tribunal found that the undisclosed income, as declared in the block return, remained the assessed income. Discover the rationale behind the tribunal’s decision, emphasizing the genuine nature of credits, the agricultural background of creditors, and the firm’s non-professional management. Learn how the tribunal concluded that the acceptance of cash loans was due to business exigencies, establishing a reasonable cause for the exemption from penalties. #IncomeTax #LegalCase #ChennaiTribunal

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Chennai
The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax
vs
Vignesh Flat Housing Promoters  
Date- 25.04.2006
Equivalent citations: 2007 105 ITD 359 Chennai, 2008 303 ITR 453 Chennai, (2007) 107 TTJ Chennai 848
Bench: M Chaturvedi, Vice, K Ranjan

ORDER M.K. Chaturvedi, Vice President

1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the deletion of penalty amounting to Rs. 1,65,85,000/- levied Under Section 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act’) and relates to the block period from 1.4.1988 to 2.9.1998.

2. We have heard the rival submissions in the light of material placed before us and precedents relied upon. The assessee is a firm comprising of 4 partners. It is engaged in the business of real estate. The firm is constructing and selling flats at Trichy. Search and seizure operations Under Section 132 of the Act were conducted in the business premises of the assessee as well as the residential premises of its partners. During the course of search certain books of account and diaries were found and seized. In response to notice issued Under Section 158BC on 4.1.1999 assessee filed its block Return on 15.3.2000 declaring undisclosed income at Rs. 59,07,160/-. AO finalized the block assessment proceedings on 29.7.2000 determining the total undisclosed income at Rs. 99,5 8,020/- as under:

Paid content

Become a Basic or Premium Member, or log in if you are already a Basic or Premium member.

Advertisement

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.