Section 271D - Page 4

Section 271D Penalty applicable on Loan from Sister Concerns in Cash

CIT Vs. Sunil Sugar Co. (Allahabad High Court)

Assessee’s contention was that the entries were not in the nature of the loan or deposit on the face of it was not acceptable, as once any amount had been received by the assessee and the same was shown as received in its books of account, then it had partaken the nature of deposit and penal provision of section 271D was attracted. ...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271D for cash deposit with Reasonable cause from identifiable agriculturists not justified

Pr. CIT Vs Tehal Singh Khara & Sons (Punjab and Haryana High Court)

Punjab and Haryana High Court held in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Tehal Singh Khara & Sons that Penalty under section 271D of Income Tax Act, 1961 not justified for Contravention of section 269SS if assessee had given reasonable cause for entering into the cash transactions, as creditors from whom the cash was received […]...

Read More

No penalty for delay in audit report submission due to late appointment of Auditor by Registrar of Societies

The A.P. Dairy Development Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income (ITAI Hyderabad)

Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income on the basis of the provisional accounts audited by a Chartered Accountant but did not file the audited accounts. The AO, therefore, issued a notice u/s 271D for levy of penalty for non filing of the audit report. The assessee explained […]...

Read More

Limitation period U/s. 275(1)(c) not applies to penalty proceeding U/s. 271D & 271E

CIT Vs Hissaria Brothers (Supreme Court of India)

Penalty proceedings for default in not having transactions through the bank as required under Sections 269SS and 269T are not related to the assessment proceeding but are independent of it....

Read More

Limitation for penalty proceedings U/s. 271D & 271E

Circular No. 10/2016-Income Tax (26/04/2016)

It is a settled position that period of limitation of penalty proceedings under section 271D and 271E of the Act is governed by the provisions of section 275(1)(c) of the Act. Therefore, the limitation period for the imposition of penalty under these provisions would be the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the cou...

Read More

Limitation commencement for penalty proceedings U/s. 271D &271E

Circular No. 09/DV/2016 (Departmental View) (26/04/2016)

It has been brought to notice of CBDT that there are conflicting interpretations of various High Courts on the issue whether the limitation for imposition of penalty under sections 271D and 271E of the Income tax Act, 1961commences at the level of the Assessing Officer (below the rank of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax.) or at level of t...

Read More

No Penalty on Return of loan by cash to sister concern under a bonafide belief

Global Realty Heritage Venture (Cochin) (P.) Ltd., Vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Delhi)

Global Realty Heritage Venture (Cochin) (P.) Ltd., vs Addl. CIT (ITAT Delhi) In the absence of any such evidence the plea of bonafide belief in the peculiar circumstances cannot be discarded. It is seen that the assessee has consistently canvassed that there was a bonafide belief that the amount taken...

Read More

Time limit for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271D & 271E to be reckoned from date of JCIT Notice

Grihalakhsmi Vision Vs Additional CIT (Kerala High Court at Ernakulam)

The Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Grihalakshmi Vision held that the penalty proceeding under Sec 271D and 271E can be initiated by Joint commissioner only and the limitation period of six months to be reckoned from the end of month of initiation of penalty proceedings by Joint ...

Read More

No penalty u/s 271D on cash loan taken more than Rs. 20,000 if it is routed through Bank

CIT-II, Agra Vs Smt. Dimpal Yadav (Allahabad High Court)

In a landmark judgement of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT- V. Smt. Dimpal Yadav, it was held that where even through assesee had taken a loan in cash, since loan was routed through bank account of the assessee for the payment to Government for converting land into free ...

Read More

Penalty u/s 271D & 271E for raising & repayment of loans in cash cannot be imposed if sufficient reasonable cause exist

Envogue Wood Working Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

ITAT held in Envogue Wood Working Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT that if the assessee had taken and repaid the loan in cash and provided the sufficient reasonable cause of doing such then penalty u/s 271D & 271E would not be imposed....

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,438)
Company Law (5,279)
Custom Duty (7,558)
DGFT (4,090)
Excise Duty (4,317)
Fema / RBI (3,944)
Finance (4,105)
Income Tax (31,600)
SEBI (3,295)
Service Tax (3,506)

Search Posts by Date

January 2020
« Dec