Penalty U/s 271D and 271E - period of limitation - violation of ...

Penalty Orders u/ss 271D and 271E Barred by Limitation Due to Late Issuance Beyond September 30, 2010 Deadline.

June 13, 2015

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty U/s 271D and 271E - period of limitation - violation of conditions of conditions of section 269SS - Cash receipts - it had to complete by 30th September, 2010 whereas actual penalty orders were passed on 30/3/2012 which got barred by limitation. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty U/s 271D and 271E - period of limitation - violation of ...

Penalty Orders u/ss 271D and 271E Barred by Limitation Due to Late Issuance Beyond September 30, 2010 Deadline.

June 13, 2015

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Penalty u/s 271D or 271E - Penalty u/s.271D or 271E of the Act is concerned, those are independent proceedings and having nothing to do with assessment proceedings or...

Levy of penalties u/s 271D and 271E for the violation of sections 269SS and 269T, respectively - The Tribunal, after reviewing precedents from the Supreme Court and...

Levy of penalty u/ss 271D and 271E was challenged - default u/ss 269SS and 269T - assessee received and repaid cash loans from directors and related concerns - assessee...

Penalty u/s.271D & 271E - Period of limitation for imposing penalty u/s 275(1)(c) - he discussion by the AO in the assessment order and making reference to the Addl. CIT...

The case involved a challenge to penalty orders u/ss 271D and 271E before the Appellate Tribunal. The issue revolved around the reassessment proceedings being quashed,...

The case pertains to penalty proceedings u/s 271D for violating Section 269SS and Section 271E of the Income Tax Act. The assessee received Rs. 18 lakh from a trustee...

Levy of penalties under various sections - The Appellate Tribunal, in a consolidated order, addressed several appeals concerning penalties imposed under various sections...

The High Court held that the penalty order u/s 271D was barred by limitation as the order imposing penalty was required to be passed within six months from the end of...

Penalty proceedings u/s 271D and 271E - Period of limitation - Apparently in this case, the first notice was issued on 15.12.2013 and second notice was issued on...

Penalty proceedings u/s 271D, 271E and 271AAA - period of limitation - the period of six months from the end of the month in which action for imposition of penalty was...

The ITAT held that for penalty u/s 271D for contravention of section 269SS, recording satisfaction by AO is mandatory. Citing Jaya Laxmi Rice Mills case, it emphasized...

HC ruled penalty proceedings under sections 271D and 271E require explicit satisfaction to be recorded by Assessing Officer during reassessment. Mere recording of...

The key points are regarding the penalty imposed u/s 271D read with Section 269SS, and the issue of whether the penalty orders were time-barred. The Assessing Officer...

Penalty u/s 271D - violation of provisions u/s 269SS - cash receipt claimed as advance against sales - recording of the satisfaction by the AO is sine qua non for...

ITAT held that penalty order u/s 271C was barred by limitation. As per s. 275(1)(c), limitation began from date when AO recommended initiation of penalty proceedings to...

Quick Updates: