Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.21 seconds)
Bommarabettu Madhu Sudhana Acharya ... vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 And Tps, ... on 13 February, 2026 cites

The Commissioner Of Income-Tax, ... vs The Nagpur Hotel Owners Association ... on 13 December, 2000

9.3 Though the judgement cited (supra) was given before the introduction of amendment, wherein property transaction in cash was included, but the basic premise of section 269SS of the Act remains the same i.e. to deter the use of unaccounted money and allow relief as per provisions of section 273B of the Act considering reasonable cause. On a similar footing, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs. Panchsheel Owners Associations (2017) 395 ITR 380 (Guj) (HC), held that "genuineness of the transaction had not been disputed and there is reasonable cause". The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chamundi Granites (Pvt.) ltd. (2002) (122 taxman 574) (SC) while considering hardship caused by section 269SS of the Act as appended to the provisions of section 273B of the Act and held that "section 273B of the Act was also incorporated which provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of section 271D of the Act, no penalty shall be imposable on the person or the assessee, as the case may be, for any failure referred to in the said provisions, if he proves that there was reasonable cause for such failure and if the assessee proves that there was reasonable cause for failure to take a loan and otherwise than by account payee cheque, or account payee demand draft, then the penalty may not be levied".
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 126 - Full Document

Orient Paper And Industries Ltd. ... vs State Of Orissa And Ors. Etc on 30 October, 1990

9.6 Section 273B starts with a non obstante clause and provides that notwithstanding anything contained in several provisions enumerated therein including section 271D, no penalty shall be imposable on the person or the assessee, as the case may be, for failure referred to in the said provisions, if he proves that there was reasonable cause for the said failure. A clause beginning with 'notwithstanding anything' is sometimes appended to a section in the beginning with a view to give the enacting part of the section in case of conflict, an over-riding effect over the provision or Act mentioned in the non obstante clause - Orient Paper & Industries Ltd. v. State of Orissa AIR 1991 SC 672.
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 71 - T K Thommen - Full Document

Parayankandiyil Eravath Kanapravan ... vs K. Devi And Ors. on 22 June, 1989

The true effect of the non obstante clause is that in spite of the provision or the Act mentioned in the non obstante clause, the enactment following it will have its full operation or that the provisions embraced in the non obstante clause will not be an impediment for the operation of the enactment - Smt. Parayankandiyal Eravath Kanapravan Kalliani Amma v. K. Devi ÅIR 1996 SC 1963. Therefore, in order to bring in application of section 27 ID in the backdrop of section 273B, absence of reasonable cause, ITA No.937/Bang/2025 Bommarabettu Madhusudhana Acharya, Bengaluru Page 12 of 13 existence of which has to be established by the assessee, is the sine qua non.
Kerala High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 69 - Full Document
1