The case involved a challenge to penalty orders u/ss 271D and ...

Case challenged penalty orders u/s. 271D and 271E due to reassessment proceedings being quashed. Tribunal ruled penalties baseless.

Case Laws Income Tax

July 2, 2024

The case involved a challenge to penalty orders u/ss 271D and 271E before the Appellate Tribunal. The issue revolved around the reassessment proceedings being quashed, leading to the argument that penalty proceedings should not stand. The Assessing Officer alleged violations u/ss 269SS and 269T due to transactions involving loans taken and repayments made outside the prescribed methods. The Tribunal noted that the reassessment proceedings had been invalidated, rendering the penalty proceedings baseless. Citing relevant case law, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, deleting the penalties imposed by the Assessing Officer.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The case involved a challenge to penalty orders u/ss 271D and ...

Case challenged penalty orders u/s. 271D and 271E due to reassessment proceedings being quashed. Tribunal ruled penalties baseless.

Case Laws Income Tax

July 2, 2024

You may also like:

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 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...

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...

Penalty u/s 271D / 271E - violation of provisions of Sec.269SS and 269T - basis of presumption u/s 132(4A) - Period of limitation - The Tribunal found that the penalty...

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...

The Rajasthan High Court examined the validity of revision proceedings u/s 263 concerning the period of limitation. The issue was whether the period of limitation for...

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...

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...

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...

Reopening of assessment u/s 147 - ‘loan given” was believed to be undisclosed income of assessee - penalty u/s 271D and 271E - the “original-conclusion” was not faulty...

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 and 271E - Period of limitation - Apparently in this case, the first notice was issued on 15.12.2013 and second notice was issued on...

Penalty imposed u/s 271D and 271E - the availing and re–payment of loan through book entries was prior to 12th June 2012. Therefore non–compliance to the provisions of...

Levy of penalties under various sections - The Appellate Tribunal, in a consolidated order, addressed several appeals concerning penalties imposed under various sections...

Validity of the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) - post search assessment - in the case on hand the pending reassessment proceedings u/s 147 got abated by...

Quick Updates: