https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750959 The ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty levied under section 271DA for cash receipts exceeding Rs. 2,00,000 through split invoices. The CIT(A) had confirmed the penalty, finding the assessee circumvented section 269ST by issuing two separate bills below Rs. 2,00,000 to the same customer. However, the ITAT held this constituted only a technical breach, citing Hindustan Steel Ltd v. State of Orissa that penalties should not be imposed for technical or venial violations. The tribunal found good and sufficient cause existed, determining the default was technical in nature and did not warrant penalty imposition. en-us Tue, 02 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Dec 2024 16:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750959 The ITAT Delhi allowed the assessee's appeal against penalty levied under section 271DA for cash receipts exceeding Rs. 2,00,000 through split invoices. The CIT(A) had confirmed the penalty, finding the assessee circumvented section 269ST by issuing two separate bills below Rs. 2,00,000 to the same customer. However, the ITAT held this constituted only a technical breach, citing Hindustan Steel Ltd v. State of Orissa that penalties should not be imposed for technical or venial violations. The tribunal found good and sufficient cause existed, determining the default was technical in nature and did not warrant penalty imposition. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 02 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750959