Penalty u/s 271D - period of limitation - CIT(A) took the date ...

Dispute Over Limitation Period for Penalty u/s 271D of Income Tax Act; Reference Date Controversy Arises.

January 2, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271D - period of limitation - CIT(A) took the date on which the one year period from the end of the financial year in which the notice was issued as 31/03/2022. - We are unable to understand where from this date has come. Expiry of one year is not relatable to this date either from the date of the assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 or from the date of issuance of notice u/s 271D of the Act, initiating the proceedings. - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271D - period of limitation - CIT(A) took the date ...

Dispute Over Limitation Period for Penalty u/s 271D of Income Tax Act; Reference Date Controversy Arises.

January 2, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

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...

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...

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...

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...

Period of limitation for levy of penalty - Penalty proceedings u/s 271D - penalty order, was passed beyond the time period prescribed by Section 275(1)(c) - the same...

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...

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...

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

The ITAT examined multiple aspects of a tax penalty case involving undisclosed income. The tribunal found no justification for penalty u/s 271(1)(c) across various...

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...

Arbitration application allowed u/s 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Court's role limited to determining existence of arbitration agreement and not...

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. 271E - period of limitation - There is no dispute that the period of limitation is required to be examined as per Section 275(1)(c) - it is futile to...

Penalty u/s 271(1) (c) - period of limitation - treatment of lease rent income - in the revised return, assessee claimed the same as income from house property to claim...

Quick Updates: