2006 (9) TMI 102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ispose of I.T.A. Nos.102 and 17 of 1999. The facts have been taken from I.T.A. No.102 of 1999. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue proposing following substantial question of law : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in upholding the deletion of penalty under section 271E by the Commissioner of Income-tax .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dhar on June 10, 1991 by issue of notice under section 271E of the Act. Subsequently, penalty under section 271E was imposed by the then Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Range I, Jalandhar at Rs.10,000 vide order passed by him on October 21,1991. 3. On appeal, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appals) Jalandhar deleted the said penalty vide his order passed in appeal No.700/91-92/CIT(A)/Jal., .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rson or the assessee, as the case may be, for any failure referred to in the said provision if he proves that there as reasonable cause for such failure and if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for such failure to take a loan otherwise than by account-payee cheque or account-payee demand draft, then the penalty may not be levied. Therefore, undue hardship is very much mitigated b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X