Income Tax : Indian tax law restricts cash transactions to promote digital payments. Limits apply to expense payments (Sec 40A(3): ₹10k/day),...
Income Tax : A summary of key penalties under the Income Tax Act for AY 2026-27, covering defaults from late filing and non-payment to misrepor...
Income Tax : Understand relief mechanisms and defences under Section 271D of the Income Tax Act for accepting cash loans or deposits over ₹20...
Income Tax : Supreme Court ruling on cash property deal cites wrong tax law (269ST instead of 269SS), but mandates reporting of large cash tra...
Income Tax : Simplified penalty timelines under Section 275 effective April 2025, including changes in penalty powers, omissions, and clarifica...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that mere observations about cash transactions are insufficient to levy penalty under Section 271D. A specific ...
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 : ITAT Kolkata set aside the penalty order under Section 271D after the assessee claimed inadequate opportunity of hearing during pe...
Income Tax : The Court ruled that although the Joint Commissioner is the competent authority to levy penalty, initiation of proceedings still r...
Income Tax : The Gujarat High Court held that revisional powers under Section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Commissioner prefers ano...
Income Tax : It is a settled position that period of limitation of penalty proceedings under section 271D and 271E of the Act is governed by th...
Income Tax : It has been brought to notice of CBDT that there are conflicting interpretations of various High Courts on the issue whether the l...
ITAT Chennai held that penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Income Tax Act duly leviable as reasonable cause for accepting loans and advances in cash in contravention of provisions of Sec.269SS & 269TT not explained.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act is without any satisfaction and, therefore, no such penalty can be levied. Accordingly, penalty u/s 271D quashed.
Landmark case of DCIT Vs Trans Asia Packaging Ltd, where ITAT Delhi provided clarity on transactions post amalgamation under Section 269SS of Income Tax Act
ITAT Ahmedabad held that penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act leviable for contravention of provisions of section 269SS on failure to establish any reasonable cause for taking cash loans.
ITAT Indore held that as AO unable to found source of any cash loans during the search proceedings, provisions of section 269SS/ 269T of the Income Tax Act cannot be applied.
Sri Raja Reddy Nalla Vs Add. CIT (ITAT Hyderabad) Assessee had received cash in connection with sale of immovable property . As the amount was more than the specified limit of Rs. 20,000/- , penalty proceedings u/s. 271D were initiated for violating Sec 269SS and penalty order u/s. 271D was passed levying a penalty of […]
ITAT Ahmedabad held that penalty under section 271D of the income Tax Act not leviable as reasonable cause for violation of provisions of section 269SS duly demonstrated.
ITAT Delhi held that considering the bonafide and genuine transaction, reasonable cause in terms of section 273B of the Act, exist in the case of the assessee for not complying with the provision of section 269SS and 269T, and therefore, penalty u/s 271D and 271E not leviable.
ITAT Bangalore held that any proceedings taken against the deceased before his death shall be deemed to have been taken against the legal representative. However, penalty order passed in the name of death person after his death is invalid.
Jagdish Chandra Suwalka Vs JCIT (ITAT Jaipur) ITAT observed that the provisions contained u/s 275(1)(a)are not applicable on the facts of present case for the reason that undisputedly no appeal has been filed against the assessment order passed on 28.12.2017. Therefore, it cannot be said that the relevant assessment or other order was subjected to […]
