Penalty u/s 271D - acceptance of in cash in contravention to the ...

Penalty for Cash Transactions Deleted Due to Lack of Recorded Satisfaction in Assessment Order.

December 13, 2023

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty u/s 271D - acceptance of in cash in contravention to the provision of section 269SS - Satisfaction must be recorded in the original assessment order for the purpose of initiation of penalty proceedings - Penalty deleted - AT

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty u/s 271D - acceptance of in cash in contravention to the ...

Penalty for Cash Transactions Deleted Due to Lack of Recorded Satisfaction in Assessment Order.

December 13, 2023

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Penalty levied u/s 271D for contravention of Section 269SS, which restricts cash transactions above a specified sum for immovable property. The key points are: The...

The Appellate Tribunal held that the assessment orders issued u/s 153C for the assessment years 2011-12 and 2012-13 were beyond the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) - non recording of satisfaction - When satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of IT Act is recorded by the AO in...

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...

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

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...

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....

Absence of valid satisfaction recorded by AO before initiating assessment under special provision where search took place. Satisfaction note did not reveal AO's averment...

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...

Validity of Penalty u/s 271D and u/s 271E - Penalty proceeding as independent of the assessment proceeding - absence of satisfaction recorded in the reassessment u/s 147...

The assessment order passed u/s 153C was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue's interest. The Assessing Officer initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271AAC instead of...

The High Court quashed the reopening of assessments u/s 148, holding that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer were cryptic, vague, lacking nexus, and...

ITAT overturned multiple additions made by AO regarding property transactions and unexplained cash receipts. On capital gains computation under s.50C, ITAT directed...

The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, setting aside the block assessment order due to improper assumption of jurisdiction under section 158BD. The Tribunal found that...

The ITAT held that the assessment years 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 were beyond the 10-year limitation period u/s 153C read with Explanation-1 to section 153A. Hence,...

Quick Updates: