Income Tax : The provisions regulate acceptance, payment, and receipt of cash beyond specified limits. They impose strict penalties to discoura...
Income Tax : Covers the latest cash withdrawal, deposit, and loan limits. Takeaway: exceeding thresholds can trigger TDS, penalties, and blocke...
Income Tax : Explains when director cash infusions qualify as current account transactions and why genuine business support may fall outside Se...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271DA cannot be imposed when the assessment order lacks recorded satisfaction of a 26...
Income Tax : Summary of income-tax rules on cash limits, including disallowance of cash expenditure, restrictions on loans, deposits, receipts,...
Income Tax : DON’T √ Accept cash of Rs. 2,00,000 or more in aggregate from a single person in a day or for one or more transactions r...
Income Tax : It is suggested that there should be a positive provision under the I.T. Act that any transaction involving more than Rs.3,00,000/...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that mere observations about cash transactions are insufficient to levy penalty under Section 271D. A specific ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that agricultural land situated beyond notified municipal limits is not a capital asset under the Income Tax Act...
Income Tax : The Telangana High Court set aside a penalty under Section 271D after finding that the assessment order contained no recorded sati...
Income Tax : The Gujarat High Court held that revisional powers under Section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Commissioner prefers ano...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that levy of penalty under Section 271D requires pending or completed assessment proceedings containing findings o...
Income Tax : Notification No. 8/2020-Income-Tax- CBDT has notified Other electronic modes by inserting New Income TAx Rule 6ABBA. It also amend...
Income Tax : In the Income-tax Rules, 1962, in Appendix II, in Form No. 3CD, for serial number 31 and the entries relating thereto the followin...
Fema / RBI : Section 269SS and 269T of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the requirements under the Income Tax Act, 1961, as amended from time to time,...
The Tribunal ruled that mere observations about cash transactions are insufficient to levy penalty under Section 271D. A specific finding establishing contravention of Section 269SS is mandatory before imposing penalty.
The Tribunal held that agricultural land situated beyond notified municipal limits is not a capital asset under the Income Tax Act. It deleted the entire capital gains addition arising from sale of such land.
The Telangana High Court set aside a penalty under Section 271D after finding that the assessment order contained no recorded satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings. The Court held that Supreme Court precedent on mandatory satisfaction was binding on tax authorities.
The Gujarat High Court held that revisional powers under Section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Commissioner prefers another valuation method. The Court ruled that the Assessing Officer had conducted proper inquiry and adopted a plausible view based on the DVO report.
ITAT Delhi held that levy of penalty under Section 271D requires pending or completed assessment proceedings containing findings on Section 269SS violation. Since no regular assessment was framed, the penalty was directed to be deleted.
The ITAT ruled that penalty proceedings under Section 271D are invalid if the Assessing Officer fails to record satisfaction in assessment or related proceedings. Since no assessment proceedings existed in the case, the penalty was held unsustainable in law.
The Tribunal held that enhancement of income without issuing notice under section 251(2) is invalid. Such action violates principles of natural justice, leading to quashing of enhancement and related penalty directions.
The provisions regulate acceptance, payment, and receipt of cash beyond specified limits. They impose strict penalties to discourage large cash transactions.
The Tribunal held that Section 50C may not apply if properties are held as stock-in-trade. It remanded the case to verify whether transactions were part of real estate business.
The issue was whether rejection of books and GP estimation was justified due to missing records. ITAT upheld the addition, ruling that failure to produce bills, vouchers, and stock records justified estimation.
