Swarnjitsingh Anand v/s Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

The assessee, Swarnjitsingh Anand, is a senior citizen who retired from the Maharashtra State Electricity Board and relies on income from his pension. During the assessment year 2018-19, he sold a residential property in Amravati for Rs. 13,00,000. The property was sold on 19/01/2018, but the assessee received the entire payment in cash prior to 15/02/2015. The Assessing Officer and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) questioned the delay in the registration of the property and imposed a penalty under section 271D of the Income Tax Act. The assessee appealed against this order, arguing that the penalty was unwarranted as the transaction occurred before the amendment of section 269SS and that he had disclosed the income in his return.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not considering the explanation of the assessee regarding the delay in registration of the property.
• 2. Whether the penalty imposed under section 271D was justified.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Assessee.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Subramanian Manoharan vs. The Income Tax Officer

  Chennai bench

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

  Nagpur bench

• Abbayi Sunkara vs. Income Tax Officer

  Visakhapatnam bench

• Trupti Kamalkant Tiwari vs ITO, Ward-3(4), Nagpur

  Nagpur bench

• Sapna Jain vs JCIT Range-63

• Rina Ray

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2018-2019Allowed