ITAT Jaipur quashes Section 271D penalty as funds received were advances, not loans

Sh. Balbir Singh Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur)

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Jaipur has quashed a penalty levied under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act against Balbir Singh, ruling that the funds he received were advances against a property sale, not loans. This decision follows a second round of litigation, where the ITAT revisited the case to verify the ownership of the property in question. The initial dispute centered on Rs. 1 crore received by Singh from Smt. Maya Devi, which the Assessing Officer (AO) had deemed a loan, triggering the penalty for n

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.