Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
ITAT dismissed the appeal of Appellant-Revenue and upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of penalty under s.271D, holding that Revenue failed to prove contravention of s.269SS by the Respondent-Assessee. The Tribunal emphasized that s.269SS is predicated on receipt of money in cash and non-cash modes permissible under Rule 6ABBA, and the Assessing Officer did not adduce any direct evidence of cash receipt in the immovable property sale. Reliance on generalized practices and circumstantial inferences without a DVO report or concrete material was held insufficient. Consequently, penalty under s.271D could not be sustained and the appeal was dismissed.
ITAT dismissed the appeal of Appellant-Revenue and upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of penalty under s.271D, holding that Revenue failed to prove contravention of s.269SS by the Respondent-Assessee. The Tribunal emphasized that s.269SS is predicated on receipt of money in cash and non-cash modes permissible under Rule 6ABBA, and the Assessing Officer did not adduce any direct evidence of cash receipt in the immovable property sale. Reliance on generalized practices and circumstantial inferences without a DVO report or concrete material was held insufficient. Consequently, penalty under s.271D could not be sustained and the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
