Section 271D - Page 4

Mere genuineness of Transaction not enough for non levy of Penalty U/s. 271D

Deepak Sales & Properties Pvt. Ltd  Vs  ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

Deepak Sales & Properties Pvt. Ltd  Vs  ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) There is no dispute between the parties that bonafide nature of transactions alone would not be sufficient to escape the clutches of sec. 271D of the Act. As per the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kum. A.B. Shanthi (supra), it […]...

Read More

Section 269SS not applies to Loan transaction between husband & wife

Shri Sunil Kumar Sood Vs The JCIT (ITAT Delhi)

Since in the present case also the assessee had taken the loan from his wife for the purchase of house which is for the benefit of the whole family, therefore, following the decision cited [supra], we hold that penalty levied u/s 271D of the Act in the instant case is not justified. ...

Read More

No Penalty for cash above Rs. 20000 from relatives due to Business Exigencies

Mr. Girishkumar Popatlal Vs JCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)

The ld. counsel vehemently stated that the legislative intent in prohibiting the acceptance and repayment of money in cash over and above Rs. 20,000/- is to check the unaccounted money and not to hit the genuine business need....

Read More

HC upheld penalty U/s. 271D for Accepting Deposits from Staff Members in Cash as Assessee fails to prove reasonable cause

The Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/s Al-Ameen Educational Trust

The Revenue is in appeal against the common order of the Tribunal for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The issue relates to acceptance of loans and deposits other than by way of Cheque or Draft, in violation of Section 269SS of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [for brevity the Act] and the resultant penalty levied under Section 271D, tot...

Read More

All you need to know about various provisions in relation to Cash transactions under Income tax Act

The Government of India with an intention to evade black money and to discourage the cash transactions time and again taking various steps. Specially the Income tax Act is amended and provided with disallowances and stringent penal provisions for various types of cash transactions. Let us briefly understand some of such provisions here....

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

S. 269SS: Cash Transactions with Sister-in-Law & Nephew not amounts to Loan

Sri Jagmohan Sharma Vs. JCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

Sri Jagmohan Sharma Vs. JCIT (ITAT Kolkata) The transactions between these family members are neither loans nor deposit and purely a family system and purely a family requirement to help each other in the needy hours, for example medical help, education help and expenses to run the family. That is, one member of the family […]...

Read More

Section 269SS not applies to Cash Transaction between Close Family Members for giving support & help

Sri Nikhil Banik Mazumder Vs. JCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

To support the family members, the money has been given by the assessee to his son/wife. This is simply a transfer of money from one family member to another family member to support day to day expenses, educational expenses and other family expenses...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271D cannot be imposed in absence of payment in cash

CIT Vs. Apex Finlease Ltd. & Ors. (Allahabad High Court)

CIT Vs. Apex Finlease Ltd. & Ors. (Allahabad High Court) Section 269SS does not include in its ambit where there is a transaction of loan or deposit by way of entries in the books of account by crediting or debiting the account of the other person. In other words, the provisions of section 269SS of […]...

Read More

Penalty not justified for loan received in cash and immediately refunded

The Income Tax Officer Vs Mrs. Lakshmi Vishwanath (ITAT Delhi)

The Income Tax Officer Vs Mrs. Lakshmi Vishwanath (ITAT Delhi) Briefly the facts of the case are that the A.O. in the assessment order noted that assessee was asked to explain source of the cash deposit in her bank account maintained with State Bank of India. The assessee attended the proceedings before A.O. and filed […]...

Read More

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

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,821)
Company Law (6,207)
Custom Duty (7,810)
DGFT (4,248)
Excise Duty (4,372)
Fema / RBI (4,253)
Finance (4,466)
Income Tax (33,570)
SEBI (3,539)
Service Tax (3,567)

Search Posts by Date

July 2020
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031