Income Tax : A consolidated guide to Income-tax Act threshold limits for AY 2026-27 covering exemptions, deductions, TDS, TCS, compliance and p...
Income Tax : This FAQ serves as a reference for the Income-tax Act provisions relating to cash receipts, loans, repayments, and electronic paym...
Income Tax : The Income-tax Act contains strict provisions under Sections 40A(3), 269SS, 269ST, 269SU, and 269T to regulate cash transactions, ...
Income Tax : This clarifies how cash receipts are tested on daily, transaction, and occasion-based thresholds. It explains why breaking payment...
Income Tax : SEO Description: Explains which gifts qualify for exemption based on the statutory definition of “relative” and why not all fa...
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 : In order to achieve the mission of the Government to move towards a less cash economy to reduce generation and circulation of blac...
CA, CS, CMA : The Finance Bill, 2017 proposed an insertion of Section 271J in the Income-tax Act, 1961. Considering the undue hardships to be ca...
Income Tax : It has also been decided that the restriction on cash transaction under section 269ST shall not apply to withdrawal of cash from ...
Income Tax : In order to achieve the mission of the Government to move towards a less cash economy to reduce generation and circulation of blac...
Income Tax : Penalty under section 271DA could not be sustained merely on the basis of unverified seized data without independent corroborative...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that penalty under Section 271DA cannot be sustained where the Assessing Officer failed to record a clear and consci...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that high sea sales could not be treated as non-genuine where customs approvals, sale agreements, and delivery rec...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi deleted penalties imposed for alleged cash transactions after holding that the electronic evidence relied upon by the R...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that consolidated Excel entries showing aggregate cash sales were insufficient to establish receipt of ₹2 lakh...
Income Tax : Cash receipt by ‘Co-op. Society’ from dealer across multiple days not to be aggregated for Sec. 269ST purpose: CBDT Reference ...
Income Tax : CBDT issues Corrigendum to Notification No. 56/2021-Income Tax Dated: 7th May, 2021 and stated that word ‘payee ‘to ...
Income Tax : Hospitals / medical facilities providing #COVID19 treatment to patients can now receive cash payments even higher than ₹ 2 lakh....
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 : Representations have been received from the stakeholders regarding applicability of income-tax provision to cash sale of agricultu...
The Court issued notice in a plea to quash criminal proceedings where the applicant argued that alleged cash payments exceeding ₹2 lakh should first be examined under Section 269ST of the Income Tax Act.
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.
This clarifies how cash receipts are tested on daily, transaction, and occasion-based thresholds. It explains why breaking payments into parts does not avoid penalty exposure.
SEO Description: Explains which gifts qualify for exemption based on the statutory definition of “relative” and why not all family gifts are tax-free under Section 56(2)(x).
The Tribunal held that section 269SS targets cash advances in property transactions. Cash received at the time of registration was found to be outside its scope.
The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271DA cannot be imposed when the assessment order lacks recorded satisfaction of a 269ST violation. The ruling confirms that satisfaction by the Assessing Officer is a mandatory precondition.
ITAT Delhi ruled that penalties under section 271DA cannot be levied without the AO recording satisfaction in the assessment order, following Supreme Court precedent.
ITAT Chennai held that when sales are accepted and supported by records, entire purchases cannot be treated as bogus merely because suppliers were untraceable. Addition restricted to 12.5% as profit element.
The Karnataka High Court set aside a penalty notice and order under Section 271DA for violating Section 269ST, holding the proceedings were time-barred. Following the K. Umesh Shetty precedent, the Court ruled that the delay between the AO’s reference and the penalty notice constituted unreasonable laches, vitiating the entire action.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that provisions of section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Income Tax Act gets applicable as source of undisclosed income admitted during the course of survey not explained. Merely disclosing and paying tax doesn’t protect assessee from clutches of section 69A.
