Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Satbir Kumar Sarlia Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
Related Assessment Year : 2011-12
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Satbir Kumar Sarlia Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) VSV Settlement for Quantum Does Not Wipe Out Independent 271D Penalty-960-Day Delay Condoned; Penalty u/s 271D Remanded— Assessee filed appeal against penalty u/s 271D of ₹1,38,00,000 for alleged acceptance of cash loans above ₹20,000 in violation of s.269SS. Appeal was delayed by 960 days. Assessee submitted affidavit explaining that he had opted for Vivad Se Vishwas (VSV) only for quantum proceedings & believed rectification u/s 154 (pending before CIT(A)) would resolve the issue; hence appeal before Tribunal was filed belatedly as a protect...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Penny Stock Addition Fails: ITAT Says Suspicion Cannot Replace Evidence Borrowed Satisfaction: ITAT Quashes Penny Stock Additions in Multiple Family Cases Statement Alone Cannot Justify ‘On-Money’ Addition: ITAT Mumbai Genuine ITR Mistake Cannot Lead to Tax on Wrong Income: ITAT Mumbai AO Cannot Reopen on the Same Material Examined in U/s 153C Assessment: ITAT Quashes ₹2.90 Crore Addition View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930