Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Valar and Co. Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai)
Related Assessment Year : 2018-19
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Valar and Co. Vs ITO (ITAT Chennai) Penalty U/s 271DA & 271E Invalid When Original Assessment Set Aside – ITAT Deletes Penalties The assessee, a civil contractor firm, filed its return for AY 2018-19 declaring income of ₹63.58 lakh. During scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3), the AO made additions and initiated penalty proceedings including u/s 271DA (violation of sec. 269ST for cash receipts) and u/s 271E (violation of sec. 269T). Consequently, penalties of ₹44.96 lakh u/s 271DA and ₹2 lakh u/s 271E were levied by NFAC and confirmed by the CIT(A). Subsequently, the original assessm...
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

Year-End Provisions Trigger TDS – ITAT Upholds Default but Grants Relief Window Souharda Society Wins 80P Deduction – ITAT Rejects Technical Denial & Expands Benefit Interest Paid = Deductible When Obligation Exists – ITAT Allows Claim on Capital Bond Arrangement Delay Excused, Ex-Parte Order Set Aside – ITAT Gives Fresh Hearing with Token Cost No Proof, No Exemption – ITAT Remands “Agricultural Income” Claim with Cost 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Your email address will not be published.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 *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031