Income Tax : This guide explains the penalty and prosecution framework under the Income-tax Act for AY 2026-27. It highlights the consequences ...
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 article explains how offences such as wilful tax evasion, failure to file returns, non-payment of TDS/TCS, falsification of re...
Income Tax : This article outlines major offences under the Income-tax Act that may result in prosecution, including tax evasion, non-payment o...
Income Tax : This article explains the statutory powers of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to waive or reduce penalties in genuine c...
Income Tax : ITAT held the Section 271D penalty was time-barred under Section 275(1)(c) as it was imposed after the prescribed limitation perio...
Income Tax : ITAT held that penalty under Section 271D cannot survive where the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the assessme...
Income Tax : ITAT held that penalty under Section 271D is invalid where the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the assessment o...
Income Tax : ITAT held that penalty under Section 271D cannot survive where the Assessing Officer failed to record satisfaction in the assessme...
Income Tax : Gujarat High Court upheld deletion of the Section 271D penalty, holding that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment or...
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...
Held that payment of interest on cash loan falls within the ambit of unexplained expenditure within the meaning of Section 69C of the Income Tax Act.
Assessee sold property for Rs. 50 Lacs, receiving Rs.45 Lacs through cheques and only Rs.5 Lacs in cash. Given transaction’s transparency and intent of Sec.269SS to curb black money, this case isn’t suitable for a Section 271D penalty.
Through Income tax Act, 1961 cash transaction has been limited, restricted in certain cases. In this article you will get insights about how much you are allowed to transact in cash.
ITAT Indore held that the penalty levied u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act without any assessment proceedings in the case of the assessee is not valid and liable to be quashed.
ITAT rules no penalty u/s 271D for exceeding cash transaction limit on loans taken through Account Payee Cheques. Read the full case of Sanjaykumar Patel.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules that Section 271D penalty doesn’t sustain if a loan is accepted through banking channels, relating to A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2016-17.
Explore the implications of taxation under section 115BBE, including misuse of sections 68 to 69D, consequences of high tax rates, and relevant judicial precedents.
Discover why cash payments should be avoided for personal and business transactions. Learn about the deductions affected and the potential consequences of using cash. Stay compliant with tax regulations.
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.
