Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
ITAT upheld penalty proceedings under section 271D against the assessee for accepting cash loans during FY 2016-17. Evidence from seized documents and statements of Sachin Nahar confirmed cash loans provided to Mantra Properties. The authorized representative failed to rebut the evidence during cross-examination. Despite CIT(A)'s earlier deletion of addition, ITAT ruled that concrete evidence existed through incriminating documents detailing cash loans, interest payments, and corroborative statements. The tribunal determined the penalty was justified, allowing the revenue's appeal and reinstating the penalty levied by JCIT/Addl.CIT under section 271D.
ITAT upheld penalty proceedings under section 271D against the assessee for accepting cash loans during FY 2016-17. Evidence from seized documents and statements of Sachin Nahar confirmed cash loans provided to Mantra Properties. The authorized representative failed to rebut the evidence during cross-examination. Despite CIT(A)'s earlier deletion of addition, ITAT ruled that concrete evidence existed through incriminating documents detailing cash loans, interest payments, and corroborative statements. The tribunal determined the penalty was justified, allowing the revenue's appeal and reinstating the penalty levied by JCIT/Addl.CIT under section 271D.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
