Tag: Section 269SS
Penalty u/s 271D stayed as assessee denied having received cash loan and matter was pending in Civil Court In a recent judgment, the Hon’ble High Court has stayed penalty order u/s 271D stayed as assessee denied having received cash loan and matter was pending in Civil Court. ABCAUS …
No penalty can be levied if AO failed to record such satisfaction in assessment order. Penalty proceedings would necessarily be initiated in the quantum assessment order itself. In a recent judgment, ITAT has deleted income tax penalty u/s 271D and 271E holding that no penalty can be levied …
Section 269SS not apply to cash receipt of sale consideration of immovable property, it deals only with loan or deposit – ITAT In a recent judgment, ITAT has held that section 269SS of the Act does not deals with the receipt of ‘sale consideration of immovable property’ in …
Penalty u/s 271D for violation of Section 269SS can not be escaped by establishing genuineness or bona fides of the transactions – ITAT ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3752 (2023) (05) ITAT Important Case Laws relied upon:Hareshkumar Bechardas Patel Vs. Jt. CIT (2019) 69 ITR 73 (SN) (Ahd.) (Trib.)ITO …
Penalty u/s 271D initiated when assessee was alive but order invalid if passed in the name of assessee after his death ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3733 (2023) (05) ITAT Important Case Laws relied upon:ITO v. Bhupendra Bhikhalal Desai 131 taxmann.com 40 (SC)ITO vs. Durlabhbhai Kanubhai Rajpara 114 taxmann.com …
Liability of company paid by Director in cash is cash loan u/s 269SS liable to Penalty u/s 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. ABCAUS Case Law Citation ABCAUS 3640 (2023) (01) ITAT Important Case Laws relied upon:CIT v. Dimple Yadav, reported in (2015) 280 CTR (All) 309CIT …
Advance taken in cash against sale not loan or deposit u/s 269SS hence no penalty us/ 271D is leviable on the assessee ABCAUS Case Law CitationABCAUS 3447 (2021) (02) ITAT In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) in sustaining the order …
Cash loan from wife due to business expediency. Penalty u/s 271D deleted as the business was carried on in the interest of family and genuineness/sources was not doubted ABCAUS Case Law Citation:ABCAUS 3161 (2019) (10) ITAT Important case law relied upon by the parties:Penmetsa Venkata Soma RajuDr. Dutta …
Penalty u/s 271D for taking cash loan from father and paternal aunt deleted following various decisions of High Courts and Tribunals ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 3001 (2019) (06) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties: Mohan Karkare Vs. DCIT (1995)(127 Taxation 104) CIT v. Sunil …
Penalty u/s 271D deleted for cash loan from father mother and brothers as loan was from close family relations and there was a reasonable cause u/s 273B ABCAUS Case Law Citation: ABCAUS 2927 (2019) (05) ITAT Important Case Laws Cited/relied upon by the parties CIT vs. M. …
