https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99283 Penalty under section 271D was quashed because the assessment order did not record the Assessing Officer's satisfaction that the assessee had committed a contravention attracting that penalty. The Tribunal held that such recorded satisfaction in the body of the assessment order is a jurisdictional prerequisite for valid initiation of penalty proceedings; a mere reference to penalty under section 271(1)(c) was insufficient. In the absence of that foundation, the Joint Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to proceed, the penalty order was invalid, and the appellate order sustaining it was set aside. en-us Wed, 29 Apr 2026 08:16:36 +0530 Wed, 29 Apr 2026 08:16:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99283 Penalty under section 271D was quashed because the assessment order did not record the Assessing Officer's satisfaction that the assessee had committed a contravention attracting that penalty. The Tribunal held that such recorded satisfaction in the body of the assessment order is a jurisdictional prerequisite for valid initiation of penalty proceedings; a mere reference to penalty under section 271(1)(c) was insufficient. In the absence of that foundation, the Joint Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to proceed, the penalty order was invalid, and the appellate order sustaining it was set aside. Highlights Income Tax Wed, 29 Apr 2026 08:16:36 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99283