Virambhai Ramabhai Patel, Himatnagar vs Assessee on 13 February, 2013
Similarly, in Shiv Nandan Kaushik vs. Dy. CIT (22)
74TTJ (chd-Tri) 761, it was held that transaction of Rs. 1 lac
between son and father could not be said to be a loan to father,
therefore, penalty u/s. 271D was not levied.