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 : Mumbai ITAT deleted Section 271D penalty, holding journal entry loan transfers during genuine group restructuring constituted reas...
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT deleted the Section 271D penalty, holding temporary cash received to demonstrate visa funds was not a loan attracting...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deleted Sections 271D and 271E penalties, holding cash loan transactions were bona fide and supported by reasonable ca...
Income Tax : Bengaluru ITAT quashed Section 271D penalties as time-barred, holding the six-month limitation under Section 275(1)(c) expired bef...
Income Tax : SC held that penalty under Section 271E cannot survive after the original assessment is set aside and the fresh assessment records...
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...
CIT Vs Panchsheel Owners Associations (Gujarat High Court) While completing the assessment, the Assessing Officer has noticed that the assessee, an AOP, borrowed loan of Rs. 40,00,000/- from Smt. Shantaben A. Patel, main promoter of the AOP, in cash for expeditious acquisition of land, in violation of section 269SS of the I.T. Act. Therefore, penalty […]
Loans been taken by Assessee from a sister concern in cash to make payments to labourers at site. This was held to be a reasonable explanation
DCIT Vs Analytical Technologies Ltd. (ITAT Ahmedabad) Assessee submitted that there is no contravention of Section 269SS of the Act relating to the loan transactions made through banking channel, the same are availed by the Director and passed to the assessee company through ‘journal entry’ wherein penalty u/s. 271D cannot be levied. The ld. CIT(A) […]
Raman Chaudhary Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) It is evident, the assesse is an agriculturist. For purchasing some agricultural land jointly, the assessee had availed cash loan from other agriculturists. It is a fact on record that the genuineness of the loan availed by the assessee has been accepted by the departmental authorities. Of course, there […]
ITAT held that business constraint and exigency and administrative convenience itself constitutes reasonable cause within the meaning of section 273B of the Act . Hence no penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act could be invoked for the same.
Held that there was bonafide belief of the assessee that passing journal entries, even though in violation of mode prescribed u/s. 269SS and section 269T, is permissible. Entries done before judgement of Hon’ble Bombay HC in the case of Triumph International. Penalty deleted on the basis of reasonable cause.
Shri Mohanlal Savjibhai Tilva Vs ACIT (ITAT Ahmedabad) The case of the assessee was that the loan in cash was taken from his HUF on account of extreme business exigency and necessity of honouring post dated cheques issued to the third parties. Further at that time, the assessee was not having sufficient balance in the […]
ITAT held that so far as cash receipt of by assessee from his father’s proprietary firm is concerned, the provisions of section 269SS do not stand attracted.
Explore the case of Bookmywish E-Commerce facing a penalty under Section 271D for accepting cash loans. Detailed analysis of legal perspectives and implications.
Sunil M. Bhide Vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Pune) It is seen from the penalty order that the assessee pleaded before the AO that he started construction of a commercial building on his plot. The construction work was halted because of paucity of funds. The said plot of land along with part construction was leased out […]
