Shaikh Sujayat Shaikh Islam vs ITO, Ward-3, Amravati

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, Delhi, which arose from a penalty order dated 19.11.2019 passed under section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Addl./JCIT, Range-Amravati, for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. The sole grievance of the assessee revolves around the penalty order passed under section 271D of the Act at Rs. 12,10,000/-. The assessee argued that the penalty proceedings were illegal and bad in law as there was no valid satisfaction recorded for initiating the penalty proceedings during the assessment proceedings. The assessee also claimed that the Assessing Officer proceeded on the basis of presumptions and conjectures without specific evidence of cash receipt.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the penalty proceedings initiated under section 271D of the Act are valid in the absence of valid satisfaction recorded by the Assessing Officer.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Shaikh Sujayat Shaikh Islam vs ITO, Ward-3, Amravati

  Nagpur bench

• R. Viswanathan v. The DCIT, Central Circle-1(4), Chennai

• C & S Electric Limited vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre

  Delhi Bench 'B', New Delhi benchAY 2015-16Allowed

• Shree Krishna Vanaspati Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-23(3), New Delhi

  Delhi Bench ‘G’ benchAY 2012-13Allowed

• Ashitavinayak Nagari Sahakari Path Sanstha Maryadit vs ITO, Ward-1, Amravati

  Nagpur bench

• BOSE CORPORATION INDIA P. LTD. Vs. ACIT

  DELHI BENCH benchAY 2007-08 & 2008-09Allowed