Assessee accepted cash deposits of Rs. 8,47,900, claiming these belonged to persons who used his account to obtain demand drafts for liquor licence applications and were later repaid, but could not substantiate this beyond stereotyped affidavits stating the depositors had no bank accounts; penalty under section 271D was upheld by CIT(A) as not credible. On appeal, the Tribunal held that the affidavits failed to clarify whether the depositors had bank accounts at the time of repayment, rendering the facts incomplete, and since the assessee’s records had not been properly examined below, the matter was remanded for fresh verification and a fresh decision on penalty after affording a hearing. (AY.2011-12)