<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Jurisdictional satisfaction for cash receipt penalty requires clear findings and independent proof; unsupported levy fails.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101131</link>
    <description>Recording of satisfaction in the assessment order is treated as a jurisdictional prerequisite for initiating penalty for cash receipts in contravention of the statutory banking-route rule; a vague reference to possible penalty proceedings is insufficient, and the defect cannot be cured later in the notice, penalty order or appeal. The Tribunal also held that the alleged contravention must be proved with independent and cogent evidence of the payer, date, amount and statutory threshold breach. Rejected books, estimated income and an uncorroborated admission of additional income were not enough. On that basis, the penalty was held unsustainable and deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 07:07:29 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 07:07:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=908737" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Jurisdictional satisfaction for cash receipt penalty requires clear findings and independent proof; unsupported levy fails.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101131</link>
      <description>Recording of satisfaction in the assessment order is treated as a jurisdictional prerequisite for initiating penalty for cash receipts in contravention of the statutory banking-route rule; a vague reference to possible penalty proceedings is insufficient, and the defect cannot be cured later in the notice, penalty order or appeal. The Tribunal also held that the alleged contravention must be proved with independent and cogent evidence of the payer, date, amount and statutory threshold breach. Rejected books, estimated income and an uncorroborated admission of additional income were not enough. On that basis, the penalty was held unsustainable and deleted.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2026 07:07:29 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=101131</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>