As per the provisions of section 271D and 271E, for any default ...

Assistant Commissioner's Penalty Imposition Invalid Due to Jurisdiction Overreach u/ss 271D and 271E.

May 9, 2017

Case Laws Income Tax AT

As per the provisions of section 271D and 271E, for any default u/s 269SS and 269T, penalty is leviable. However, such penalty is to be imposed by the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax. The assessment order in the present case was completed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and hence beyond his jurisdiction. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

As per the provisions of section 271D and 271E, for any default ...

Assistant Commissioner's Penalty Imposition Invalid Due to Jurisdiction Overreach u/ss 271D and 271E.

May 9, 2017

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...

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...

Penalty imposed u/s 271D and 271E - the availing and re–payment of loan through book entries was prior to 12th June 2012. Therefore non–compliance to the provisions of...

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...

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

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...

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,...

Penalties levied u/ss 271D and 271E were challenged. The assessee was found to have violated Sections 269SS and 269T. However, there was no concrete finding that the...

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...

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

Penalty u/s. 271D - assessee has repaid loans/ deposits from various sister concerns through journal entries, i.e., otherwise than account payee cheques/draft - though...

Violation of the provisions of Sections 269SS and 269T - scope of the term "loan" and "deposit" - Penalty u/s 271D and 271E - amount received on account of share...

Penalty u/s 271D & 271E - allegation of cash loan having been taken/repaid - The ITAT underscored the principle that penalties under Sections 271D and 271E for...

Levy of penalty u/s.271D/271E - transaction by passing a journal entry - proof of reasonable cause u/s 273B - the business constraint and exigency and administrative...

Penalty u/s 271D and 271E - creation/ assignment of debt and liabilities vide journal entries - These entries arise in the normal course of day to day business...

Quick Updates: