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 : 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 : This article outlines major penalties under the Income-tax Act for defaults involving tax payments, return filing, TDS compliance,...
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 : ITAT Jaipur deleted penalties under Sections 271D and 271E, holding the cash transaction was not a loan or deposit under Sections ...
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 : 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...
The ITAT Kolkata held that cash introduced by partners as capital contribution in an LLP does not attract Section 269SS and therefore penalty under Section 271D was invalid.
The ITAT ruled that absence of recorded satisfaction in the assessment order bars initiation of penalty under Section 271E. Supervisory revision cannot substitute the Assessing Officer’s statutory discretion.
ITAT held that penalties under sections 271D and 271E cannot survive once the underlying additions are deleted. The ruling confirms that penalties collapse with the quantum.
Penalties were imposed for cash transactions during the first year of business. The Tribunal found bona fide circumstances and no tax-evasion intent, granting relief under section 273B. The ruling underscores liberal interpretation of reasonable cause.
Applying settled law, the Tribunal held that penalties imposed after expiry of the limitation period are void. Both loan and repayment penalties were deleted across multiple years.
The issue was whether additions can rest on seized loose sheets termed as dumb documents. The Tribunal upheld Section 69C additions, holding that seized material supported by statements is valid evidence.
The ruling clarifies that specified sum under section 269SS refers to advances linked to property transfers. Cash received as final consideration at registration cannot trigger penalty under section 271D.
ITAT Pune struck down a ₹34.28 lakh penalty issued after the company had merged, citing substantive illegality. Penalty orders must be issued in the name of a legally existing entity.
The issue was whether penalties under sections 271D and 271E apply to cash dealings of a credit society with its members. ITAT held that genuine, audited member transactions supported by reasonable cause are protected under section 273B.
The ITAT held that a penalty under Section 271D cannot survive without recorded satisfaction by the Assessing Officer during pending assessment proceedings.
