Penalty levied u/s 271DA - The Addl. CIT observed that the ...

Tribunal Rules No Penalty for Splitting Invoices in Minor Breach of Cash Transaction Limits for Wedding Dress Purchases.

April 4, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

Penalty levied u/s 271DA - The Addl. CIT observed that the assessee had violated Section 269ST by splitting invoices for cash receipts of Rs. 2,00,000 or more from a single person. - The Appellate Tribunal noted that the items purchased were marriage dresses and different in nature. - Section 271DA prescribes penalties for contraventions of Section 269ST. The legislative intention behind the introduction of Section 269ST was to discourage cash transactions and promote digital economy. The Tribunal referred to judicial precedents, emphasizing that penalties may not be imposed for technical or venial breaches of the Act. It considered the definitions of 'good cause' and 'sufficient cause,' as well as relevant case laws to determine the applicability of penalties. - The Tribunal concluded that no penalty was leviable.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Penalty levied u/s 271DA - The Addl. CIT observed that the ...

Tribunal Rules No Penalty for Splitting Invoices in Minor Breach of Cash Transaction Limits for Wedding Dress Purchases.

April 4, 2024

Case Laws Income Tax AT

You may also like:

Levy of penalty u/s 129(5) of GST Act for discrepancy between PIN code of petitioner in Tax Invoices and E-Way Bill. Court held minor discrepancy in PIN code in GST...

Reduction in quantum of penalty imposed under Rule 26(2) (i) & (ii) - the Tribunal would say that there is no revenue loss because M/s.Sujana Metal Products Limited have...

Revocation of Customs Broker License - Overvaluation and misdeclaration with intent to claim drawback under section 75 of Customs Act, 1962 - The tribunal acknowledged...

Penalty u/s 271(1)(b) imposed on minor - The tribunal upheld the appellant's argument regarding being a minor, stating that penalty proceedings initiated against a minor...

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...

CENVAT Credit - duty paying invoices - performa invoices - the documents required under the Rule 9 are not confined to merely invoices but these may be any documents,...

The case involved the scope of limited scrutiny and the validity of a notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee's case was selected for limited scrutiny to...

The appellant sought refund of Countervailing Duty (CVD) and Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid in cash u/s 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944 read with Section 142(3)...

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 assessee's unexplained cash credits u/s 68 were deleted by the CIT(A) after accepting the submissions that the cash receipts from various sources like cash sales,...

Levy of penalty u/r 25 of CER - Penalty on Registered Dealers, Unregistered Dealers and Transporters - Availment of fraudulent credit - issuance of Cenvatable invoices...

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

Penalty - Bogus invoice issued without selling the goods – penalty would be attracted under Rule 25 (1) (d) as well as Rule 26(1) of the Central Excise Rules, 2002 - AT

Input Tax Credit - petitioner has not fully complied with the requirements of Sub-Rule (1) and Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 38 of the Rules of 2006. - It is petitioner’s own...

Initiation of CIRP u/s 9 - time limitation - threshold limit of amount claimed - With respect to 234 invoices, which are payable within 30 days of the invoices, 224...

Quick Updates: