2003 (1) TMI 31 - HC - Income Tax

Whether Tribunal is justified in directing the Deputy Commissioner to recalculate the penalty under section 271Donly on the amount accepted during the year and that too on the amount which exceeds Rs. 20,000 in contravention of the unambiguous provisions of section 271D(1) and section 269SS of the Act of 1961 ? - Having gone through the provisions of section 269SS with regard to the mode of taking and accepting certain loans and deposits and section 271D with regard to the penalty for failure to comply with the provisions of section 269SS, we are of the opinion that in case, any loan is there exceeding Rs. 20,000 and for that purpose any penalty is to be imposed in accordance with the provisions of section 271D for violation of section 26955, the permissible amount of Rs. 20,000 has to be adjusted. Tribunal while passing these orders has not committed any illegality

Summary

The High Court of Rajasthan heard income-tax appeals against orders passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The court decided to decide both appeals together. The court found that the Tribunal did not commit any illegality in remanding the matter back to the Deputy Commissioner for recalculating the penalty. The Tribunal's order for remand was considered appropriate, and the Deputy Commissioner was instructed to proceed in accordance with the law by granting the adjustment of the permissible amount of Rs. 20,000 under section 269SS. Both appeals were disposed of based on these observations.