Advertisement
Advertisement
Skip to content
Follow Us on
Advertisement
TOP STORIES
Income Tax

No Section 271D Penalty for cash received from commission agent against sale of crops

Case Law Details

Case Name
Hardeep. Singh Vs JCIT (ITAT Chandigarh)
Date of Judgement/Order
Only available for paid members
Related Assessment Year
2014-15
Advertisement
Hardeep. Singh Vs JCIT (ITAT Chandigarh) The issue under consideration is whether CIT is correct in charging penalty u/s 271D and 271E? In the present case the Cash amount received or repaid by the assessee from the commission agent against the sale of the crops so it was neither the loan nor the deposit, therefore the provisions of Section 269SS and Section 269ST of the Act were not applicable and as such penalty levied by the A.O. and sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) under section 271 D and 271E of the Act was not justified, accordingly the same is deleted. Hence, Appeal filed by assessee is allo...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
Advertisement

Author Info

Prapti Raut
Name: Prapti Raut
Qualification: Student - CA/CS/CMA
Location: MUMBAI, Maharashtra
Articles Published: 475

Join TaxGuru's Network for the latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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