SHREEMUKH HOMES,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD

ITA 1018/HYD/2026Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 June 2026AY 2018-1976 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What were the facts?

During a search operation, incriminating materials including tally data were seized, indicating alleged cash receipts from customers in violation of Section 269ST. The assessee admitted additional income to cover discrepancies.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had not conclusively proved the violation of Section 269ST to levy penalty under Section 271DA. The penalty was also considered disproportionately high compared to the estimated income.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271DA is leviable when the violation of Section 269ST is not conclusively proved and if the admitted additional income and tax paid warrants immunity from penalty.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271DA,Section 269ST,Section 132,Section 132(4),Section 115BFA(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad “B” Bench, Hyderabad

For Appellant: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR and Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. A.R

PER BENCH : The captioned appeals filed by the assessee firm i.e. “Shreemukh Homes” are directed against the separate, but identical orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Hyderabad – 11, [for short “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 21.03.2026 perta

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 271DA

All 209 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271DA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →