Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
The ITAT quashed penalty proceedings under section 271D imposed on the assessee for accepting cash loans of Rs. 61,50,000/- in violation of section 269SS. The Tribunal held that the show cause notice dated 30.03.2021 required penalty order completion by 30.09.2021, which fell outside the Taxation and Other Laws Act (TOLA) period (20.03.2020 to 31.03.2021). Consequently, the CBDT notification dated 17.09.2021 did not extend the due date for passing the penalty order in this case. Following precedents in Mahesh Wood Products Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Subramaniam Thanu, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to quash the penalty order due to limitation issues.
The ITAT quashed penalty proceedings under section 271D imposed on the assessee for accepting cash loans of Rs. 61,50,000/- in violation of section 269SS. The Tribunal held that the show cause notice dated 30.03.2021 required penalty order completion by 30.09.2021, which fell outside the Taxation and Other Laws Act (TOLA) period (20.03.2020 to 31.03.2021). Consequently, the CBDT notification dated 17.09.2021 did not extend the due date for passing the penalty order in this case. Following precedents in Mahesh Wood Products Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Subramaniam Thanu, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to quash the penalty order due to limitation issues.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
