Income Tax : Simplified penalty timelines under Section 275 effective April 2025, including changes in penalty powers, omissions, and clarifica...
Income Tax : Income Tax Act amendments propose penalties by Assessing Officers instead of Joint Commissioners. Omission of section 271BB and ch...
Income Tax : Post-Finance Bill 2025, penalties under specified sections of the Income-tax Act will be levied by the Assessing Officer, with Joi...
Income Tax : Discover penalties and prosecutions under the Income Tax Act, 1961, including default conditions, quantum of penalties, and potent...
Income Tax : Understand key provisions on disallowance of cash expenses, limits on cash transactions, and penalties under Sections 269T, 269SS,...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi quashes penalty under Section 271D as Section 153C assessment was declared void for lack of incriminating material, cit...
Income Tax : ITAT Jaipur quashes 271D penalty against Balbir Singh, ruling funds received were advances, not loans, after verifying property ow...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai ruled that brokers facilitating land deals are not liable under Section 269SS as they act on behalf of clients and do...
Income Tax : In the recent ruling Hon'ble HC have observed that penalty proceedings, initiated u/s 271 D is barred by delay & laches as period ...
Income Tax : Rajasthan High Court quashes penalty proceedings under Section 271E of Income Tax Act citing lack of satisfaction recording in rea...
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 Hyderabad held that receipt of more than Rs. 20,000 by way of cash without any reasonable cause is in contravention of provisions of section 269SS of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, penalty under section 271D duly imposed.
In Gopinath Kanduri vs. ITO case, penalty under section 271D was imposed for a technical violation of section 269SS. Learn how tribunal ruled in favor of assessee.
Discover the legal constraints around cash transactions under India’s Income Tax Act. Learn about the various sections that impose limits and penalties on cash dealings.
High Court held that Show cause proceeding cannot be scuttled by filing a writ petition, as it is not without jurisdiction. It is open for the petitioner to reply to the SCN for violation of Sec 269SS.
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.
