Levy of penalty u/s. 271D - violation of the provisions of ...

Court Rules Insufficient Evidence to Prove Violation of Section 269SS; Penalty u/s 271D Not Justified.

March 3, 2022

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Levy of penalty u/s. 271D - violation of the provisions of Section 269SS - The entire case of the Revenue rests on interpreting the entries in a diary found during search as relating to cash receipts from customers, on the basis of one of the entry having CHQ mentioned against it matching with a bank entry the same day. Treating this entry to be representative of the rest of the entries, the Revenue held that the entries related to business receipts in lacs and in the absence of CHQ mentioned against the entry it was presumed to be receipts in cash. - the same is not sufficient to strictly establish the violation of section 269SS of the Act, of the assessee having received amounts in cash exceeding ₹ 20,000/- from a person on account of sale of flats, so as to attract levy of penalty u/s 271D of the Act. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Levy of penalty u/s. 271D - violation of the provisions of ...

Court Rules Insufficient Evidence to Prove Violation of Section 269SS; Penalty u/s 271D Not Justified.

March 3, 2022

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

The High Court held that for levying penalty u/s 271D for violation of Section 269SS, the Assessing Officer must record satisfaction that the provisions were violated....

Levy of penalty - Applicability of the substituted rule for imposition of penalty - The Supreme Court sided with the appellant, holding that the substituted rule from...

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...

The Calcutta High Court considered a case involving the clandestine removal of wire rods and the levy of a penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002. The...

Claim of second sale exemption and the imposition of penalty u/s 12(5)(iii). The High Court held that when the burden was on the dealer to prove the factum of second...

The ITAT Delhi held that the levy of penalty u/s 271D without valid satisfaction for alleged violation u/s 269SS is not justified. The AO must record satisfaction in the...

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

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...

The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that undisclosed income found during a search, related to a pawning business, falls within the scope of Section 269SS of the...

Penalty under Rule 25 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - Contravention of Rule 8(3A) - penalty under Rule 25 is not permissible, but penalty under Rule 27 is to be imposed - AT

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...

Levy of penalty - taking CENVAT Credit irregularly - it is the contention of the Assessee that there is some element of discretion available in the adjudicating officer...

Bogus sundry creditors - Whether CIT(A) had clearly violated the provisions of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, while admitting additional evidence? - The High...

Penalty for non deduction of tax at source - bona fide belief proved - penalty set aside - AT

CESTAT set aside penalties imposed under s.112(a) and s.112(b) of Customs Act 1962 against appellant for alleged gold smuggling. Court found insufficient evidence beyond...

Quick Updates: