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 held that enhancement of income without issuing notice under section 251(2) is invalid. Such action violates principl...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that Section 50C may not apply if properties are held as stock-in-trade. It remanded the case to verify whether ...
Income Tax : The issue was whether rejection of books and GP estimation was justified due to missing records. ITAT upheld the addition, ruling ...
Income Tax : The issue was whether demonetisation cash deposits can be taxed as unexplained credits solely due to use of SBN. The ITAT held tha...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that Section 269SS does not apply when cash is received as part of final sale consideration at the time of prope...
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,...
ITAT held that cash loans taken for son’s education were bona fide and supported by evidence. Reasonable cause under Section 273B justified deletion of penalty.
The ITAT Kolkata held that cash introduced by partners as capital contribution in an LLP does not attract Section 269SS and therefore penalty under Section 271D was invalid.
The ITAT Bangalore held that cash received as part of sale consideration for immovable property does not automatically attract penalty under Section 271D if reasonable cause is established under Section 273B.
The Tribunal held that cash received at the time of executing a registered sale deed does not fall within the definition of “specified sum” under Section 269SS. Since the provision primarily targets advances in property transactions, penalty under Section 271D was unsustainable.
The High Court held that courts must intimate the Income Tax Department when suits involve cash transactions exceeding Rs.2 lakh. However, it ruled that a plaintiff cannot be compelled to disclose his PAN number to defendants.
The case addressed addition of a large gift treated as unexplained cash credit. The Tribunal remanded the matter after admitting additional evidence showing the donor’s identity, relationship, and financial capacity.
The Tribunal examined suspicion surrounding a large cash advance for property. It ruled that suspicion alone cannot replace evidence, and once the transaction is substantiated, section 68 addition must be deleted.
The ITAT ruled that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment order bars initiation of penalty under Section 271E. Supervisory revision cannot substitute the Assessing Officer’s statutory discretion.
ITAT held that penalties under sections 271D and 271E cannot survive once the underlying additions are deleted. The ruling confirms that penalties collapse with the quantum.
Penalties were imposed for cash transactions during the first year of business. The Tribunal found bona fide circumstances and no tax-evasion intent, granting relief under section 273B. The ruling underscores liberal interpretation of reasonable cause.
