9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... >Dated:- 30-1-2025 X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in, Adv., Mr.Meyhul Mittal, Adv. & Mr.Rahul Kumar , Adv ORDER AVNEESH JHINGAN , J ( ORAL ) : - 1. These writ petitions are being decided by this order as the facts and issues involved are same. Though in some of the cases penalty under Section 271D and in others under Section 271E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter 'the Act of 1961') was imposed. The language of Section 271D and Section 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 271E of the Act of 1961. In the response dated 16.10.2024 the petitioner relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills reported in [(2015) 379 ITR 521 (SC)] to contend that there was no satisfaction recorded in the reassessment order for initiating the penalty proceedings under section 271E of the Act of 1961. The objections filed were re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 271E for assessing officer (hereinafter 'AO') to record the satisfaction. The counsel is not able to distinguish the citation relied upon by counsel for the petitioner. 6. The reassessment order was passed on 12.03.2024 and no satisfaction was recorded for initiating the penalty proceedings under Section 271E. 7. The reliance on the reference made by the DCIT to ACIT on 01.08.2024 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO the penalty can not be imposed. 11. In the case in hand the DCIT had only recorded satisfaction for proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act of 1961 and no satisfaction was recorded to initiate penalty proceedings under Section 271D. 12. The issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in Jai Laxmi Rice Mills (supra). The notice i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
