Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax-20 v. Shr...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax-20 v. Shri Madeshwaran M. Vannier

High Court 27 Jul 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax-20 v. Shri Madeshwaran M. Vannier
Date of order
27 Jul 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax-20 v. Shri Madeshwaran M. Vannier, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: 1.Whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this appeal.

Decision: Accordingly, appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 456 OF 2011 The Commissioner of Income Tax-20Vs.Shri Madeshwaran M. Vannier ...Appellant. ..Respondent. Mr.D.K. Kamwal for the Appellant.Mr. Rahul Hakani i/by Ajay R. Singh for the Respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 27TH JULY, 2011. P.C. 1.Whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the penalty levied under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this appeal. 2.In the present case, the assessee with a view to purchase a house obtained loan totaling to Rs.25,22,000/- from the close relatives such as Father, Mother, Sister-in-law, Mother's Brother etc. In the affidavit filed by these relatives, it was stated that they had income from agricultural operations and that loan was advanced to the assessee out of the agricultural income received by them. The Tribunal considered that failure to accept such loans in violation of section 269SS of the Act constituted reasonable cause and therefore it was not a fit case for imposition of penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3.In our opinion, the decision of the ITAT cannot be said to be perverse. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. ( A.A. SAYED, J. ) ( J.P. DEVADHAR , J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan