Sponsored
    Follow Us:

section 269SS

Latest Articles


Commonly Found Irregularities In Tax Audit Report

Income Tax : Learn about common irregularities in tax audit reports for AY 2023-24, including reporting gaps in Forms 3CA/3CB, SA 700, and sect...

December 13, 2024 31413 Views 0 comment Print

Section 269SS: Cash Transaction Rules, Penalties, Exemptions & Case Laws

Income Tax : Learn about Section 269SS, its cash transaction limits, penalties under Section 271D, exemptions, and important court rulings on t...

September 12, 2024 3474 Views 0 comment Print

Various Threshold Limits under Income Tax Act

Income Tax : In Respect of exemptions, deduction etc Income Tax Act, 1961 imposes various threshold limit. Like in respect of Tax Rates or in r...

September 6, 2024 364328 Views 44 comments Print

Summary of Section 269SS, 269ST and 269T & reporting in Tax Audit Form 3CD

Income Tax : Understand the provisions of Sections 269SS, 269ST, and 269T under Indian tax law, their implications, and reporting requirements ...

August 26, 2024 3639 Views 0 comment Print

FAQs on Disallowance of cash expenses or limit on cash transactions

Income Tax : Understand key provisions on disallowance of cash expenses, limits on cash transactions, and penalties under Sections 269T, 269SS,...

August 24, 2024 1890 Views 0 comment Print


Latest News


Clean Transactions, Cleaner Economy, Go Cashless, Go Clean

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...

March 1, 2019 1557 Views 0 comment Print

SIT report: Restrict Cash Transaction/Holding to curb black money

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/...

July 14, 2016 23926 Views 0 comment Print


Latest Judiciary


Section 271D Penalty Proceedings Void if Quantum Assessment Quashed

Income Tax : ITAT Delhi quashes penalty under Section 271D as Section 153C assessment was declared void for lack of incriminating material, cit...

March 9, 2025 81 Views 0 comment Print

Section 271E penalty cannot survive if underlying assessment order annulled: SC

Income Tax : Supreme Court rules on penalty under Section 271E of the Income Tax Act in CIT vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills. Find out how assessment o...

February 14, 2025 609 Views 0 comment Print

Section 269SS Not Applicable to Broker Acting as Agent or Facilitator of Payment

Income Tax : ITAT Chennai ruled that brokers facilitating land deals are not liable under Section 269SS as they act on behalf of clients and do...

February 11, 2025 5988 Views 0 comment Print

Section 271D Penalty: Limitation Period Commences from ITO’s Reference to Addl. CIT, Rules HC

Income Tax : In the recent ruling Hon'ble HC have observed that penalty proceedings, initiated u/s 271 D is barred by delay & laches as period ...

February 10, 2025 516 Views 0 comment Print

Section 271D Penalty Proceedings Begin with AO’s Reference: Delhi HC Clarifies Limitation Start

Income Tax : Limitation period for Section 271DA penalty should be counted from the date of the assessment order and delay in making the refere...

February 9, 2025 639 Views 0 comment Print


Latest Notifications


CBDT notifies more modes of e-payments; 6DD limit reduced to ₹ 10000

Income Tax : Notification No. 8/2020-Income-Tax- CBDT has notified Other electronic modes by inserting New Income TAx Rule 6ABBA. It also amend...

January 29, 2020 13392 Views 0 comment Print

CBDT amends form 3CD to revise reporting U/s. 269SS & 269T

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...

July 3, 2017 130173 Views 9 comments Print

Section 269SS and 269T applicable to NBFC: RBI

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,...

March 9, 2017 20790 Views 0 comment Print


Sec. 269SS Contribution towards share application money received in cash is not loan or deposit

May 28, 2010 573 Views 0 comment Print

Income Tax Appeal – Share Application Money Dispute | Abhisek Saraf’s Cash Contribution | ITAT Kolkata Decision | Penalty under s. 271D

Penalty cannot be levied u/s 271D for receiving cash from borrower by a lender in violation of section 269SS

March 19, 2010 2257 Views 0 comment Print

In our opinion, the Section 269SS and 271D are not applicable to the fact of the case since the assessee in this case received back the money in cash and not advanced money or accepted the loan in cash. The penalty In this case cannot be levied u/s 271D of the Act. for receiving the cash from the borrower, by the assessee.

Applicability of penalty U/s. section 269T of IT Act, 1961, when payment was made in cash but not exceeded Rs.20,000/- on a single day

November 24, 2009 1009 Views 0 comment Print

A plain reading of language used in the definition of `loan or deposit’ in section 269T clearly provides loan or deposit means any loan or deposit of any nature. Thus, there is no question of excluding current loan for the purpose of section 269T of the Act.

No Penalty U/s. 271D for receipt of Share application money in cash

October 22, 2009 1222 Views 0 comment Print

The Assessing officer initiated proceedings for alleged violation of section 269SS of the Act in as much as the assessee accepted share application money being Rs.20,000/- in cash. Thereafter, penalty was imposed. On appeal, CIT(A) upheld the stand of the assessee that the amount received

Receipt of share application money is neither loan nor deposit

May 6, 2009 780 Views 0 comment Print

In the present case, the alleged amount of Rs. 8.55 lakhs was received by the assessee in cash on account of share application money, penalty under s. 271D cannot be levied because the receipt of share application money is neither loan nor deposit and hence the impugned receipt of Rs. 8.55 lakhs is not governed by s. 269SS of the Act. We therefore, delete the penalty.

No Penalty for cash loan to Sister Concerns due to business exigency

March 3, 2009 2504 Views 0 comment Print

There is no dispute about the fact, that the instant cash transactions of the respondent-assessee were with the sister concern, and that, these transactions were between the family, and due to business exigency. A family transaction, between two independent assessees, based on an act of casualness, specially in a case where the disclosure thereof is contained in the compilation of accounts, and which has no tax effect

Where reasonable explanation is furnished, levy of penalty u/s 271D is not justified

July 26, 2007 1989 Views 0 comment Print

In the instant case, there was no evidence to show that money was loaned or kept deposited for a fixed period or repayable on demand. Further, the sister concerns and the assessee were owned by the same family group of people with a common managing partner with centralised accounts under the same roof

Sections 269SS have no application in respect of Share Application Money Received in cash

July 12, 2007 867 Views 0 comment Print

Q.1. What is the definition of MSME? A.1. The Government of India has enacted the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MSMED) Act, 2006 in terms of which the definition of micro, small and medium enterprises is as under:(a) Enterprises engaged in the manufacture or production, processing or preservation of goods as specified below: (i) A micro enterprise is an enterprise where investment in plant and machinery does not exceed Rs. 25 lakh;

Amount paid by firm to partners or vice versa is not a loan

January 23, 2007 1002 Views 0 comment Print

Under the general provision relating to Partnership Act that partnership firm is not a juristic person and for inter relationship different remedies are provided to enforce the rights arising out of their inter se transactions, the issue about separate entities apart, it cannot be doubted that the assessee has acted bona fide and his plea that inter se transactions

Penalty not to be imposed unless Assessee acted deliberately in defiance of law

February 22, 2005 1879 Views 0 comment Print

The apex court in Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa had long ago settled the law that penalty is not to be ordinarily imposed unless the party either acted deliberately in defiance of law and was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest or acted in conscious disregard of its obligations. Penalty will also not be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so.

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
March 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930
31