Income Tax

Limitation for penalty proceedings under sections 271D and 271E of the Income tax Act, 1961-CBDT Circular 10/2016

 

Circular No. 10/2016

F.No.279/Misc./M-140/2015-ITJ
Government of India

Ministry of Finance
Department of Revenue
Central Board of Direct Taxes
******

New Delhi, 26th April , 2016

Subject:- Limitation for penalty proceedings under sections 271D and 271E of the Income tax Act, 1961 – reg.

The issue whether the limitation for imposition of penalty under sections 271D and 271E of the Income tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is determined under section 275(1)(a) or section 275(1)(c) of the Act, has given rise to considerable litigation.

2. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Worldwide Township Projects Ltd., vide its order dated 21.5.14 in ITA No. 232/2014 , considered  the issue and observed that , It is well settled that a penalty under this provision is independent of the assessment. The action inviting imposition of penalty is granting of loans above the prescribed  limit otherwise than through banking channels and as such infringement of Section 269SS of the Act  is not related to the income that may be assessed or finally adjudicated.  In this view Section 2 75(1)(a) of the Act would not be applicable and the provisions of Section 275(1)(c) would be attracted. The judgment has been accepted by the Central Board of Direct Taxes.

3. In view of the above, it is a settled position that the period of limitation of penalty proceedings under section 271D and 271E of the Act is governed by the provisions of section 275(1)(c) of the Therefore , the limitation period for the imposition of penalty under these provisions would be the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings , in the course of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated , are completed , or six months from the end of the month in which action for imposition of penalty is initiated , whichever period expires later. The limitation period is not dependent on the pendency of appeal against the assessment or other order referred to in section 275(1)(a) of the Act.

4. Accordingly , no appeals may henceforth be filed on this ground by the officers of the Department and appeals already filed , if any, on this issue before various Courts/ Tribunals may not be pressed upon.

5. The above may be brought to the notice of all concerned.

(Sadhana Panwar)
DCIT ( SD)(ITJ),
CBDT, New Delhi.

Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Validity of demand u/s 156 for default u/s 115-O, if assessment order u/s 143(3) has Nil demand

Can a demand notice be issued u/s 156 for non-payment of Dividend tax u/s 115-O, when as per assessment order…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Issue already examined and adjudicated by CIT(Appeals), can’t be reopened on same set of facts

The issue already examined and adjudicated by the quasi-judicial authority, i.e., CIT(Appeals), cannot be reopened on the same set of…

3 days ago
  • Income Tax

TDS can’t be denied for non deposit of tax deducted by the deductor – High Court

One TDS is deducted, credit has to follow, failure of deductor to deposit the amount to the credit of the…

4 days ago
  • Income Tax

Cash withdrawal from bank can’t be taxed u/s 69C as unexplained expenditure – ITAT

Merely because assessee did not explain purpose of cash withdrawal from bank, it can not be taxed u/s 69C as…

4 days ago
  • GST

A bland statement of ‘fraud or concealment of facts” in GST Notice u/s 74 not sufficient – SC

In GST Notice u/s 74, allegations should emanate from itself, a bland statement of ‘fraud or concealment of facts” not…

6 days ago
  • Income Tax

For claiming deduction u/s 57(iii), test is of purpose and connection, not actual yield – ITAT

For claiming deduction u/s 57(iii) a reasonable and intelligible nexus should be established between the expenditure incurred and the income…

7 days ago