https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446719 The ITAT Visakhapatnam allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty u/s 271D imposed for accepting cash exceeding prescribed limits during immovable property sale. The tribunal found that while the AO had enquired about cash deposits and accepted the assessee's explanation, he failed to record satisfaction regarding penalty initiation while passing the assessment order u/s 143(3), which is a prerequisite for penalty u/s 271D. The tribunal held that issuing penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s 271D was an afterthought, citing CIT vs Jai Laxmi Rice Mills, and quashed the penalty order. en-us Wed, 29 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Dec 2023 10:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446719 The ITAT Visakhapatnam allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty u/s 271D imposed for accepting cash exceeding prescribed limits during immovable property sale. The tribunal found that while the AO had enquired about cash deposits and accepted the assessee's explanation, he failed to record satisfaction regarding penalty initiation while passing the assessment order u/s 143(3), which is a prerequisite for penalty u/s 271D. The tribunal held that issuing penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s 271D was an afterthought, citing CIT vs Jai Laxmi Rice Mills, and quashed the penalty order. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 29 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446719