Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
ITAT held that a penalty under Section 271D cannot be sustained where the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's claim of cash loans and simultaneously made an addition as unexplained investment under Section 69; the tribunal found this dual approach internally inconsistent. The legal principle applied was that imposition of penalty for contravention of the cash transaction prohibition requires an undisputed finding of cash receipt; absent acceptance of the loan claim by the assessing or appellate authority, initiation and levy of penalty is arbitrary. Outcome: appeal allowed and penalty under Section 271D deleted.
ITAT held that a penalty under Section 271D cannot be sustained where the Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's claim of cash loans and simultaneously made an addition as unexplained investment under Section 69; the tribunal found this dual approach internally inconsistent. The legal principle applied was that imposition of penalty for contravention of the cash transaction prohibition requires an undisputed finding of cash receipt; absent acceptance of the loan claim by the assessing or appellate authority, initiation and levy of penalty is arbitrary. Outcome: appeal allowed and penalty under Section 271D deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
