HARI KRISHNA LEELA PRASAD PALADUGU,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 6(1), HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 798/HYD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 December 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)14 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal ruled that since the agreement for sale and the initial advance were made before the amendment to Section 269SS, the assessee had a bonafide belief that the section did not apply to property sales at that time. This constituted a reasonable cause under Section 273B for accepting the balance consideration in cash. Therefore, the Tribunal deleted the penalty imposed under Section 271D, finding that the A.O. had erred in levying it. The additional legal ground challenging the validity of the A.O.'s order was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee received Rs.15,78,000/- in cash for the sale of immovable property in April 2016, following an initial advance of Rs.15,00,000/- in May 2015. The A.O. initiated penalty proceedings under Section 271D for contravention of Section 269SS, as the cash receipt occurred after the amendment to Section 269SS came into effect on 01.06.2015, which broadened the definition of "specified sum". The CIT(A) upheld the penalty, leading the assessee to appeal before the Tribunal.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271D for contravention of Section 269SS is leviable for cash receipt of sale consideration for immovable property when the agreement and initial advance predated the amendment to Section 269SS; and whether the lack of A.O.'s recorded satisfaction before initiating penalty proceedings invalidates the penalty order.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271D,Section 269SS,Section 143(1),Section 143(3),Section 274,Section 147,Section 273B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(5)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

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

आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-

1. 1. निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Hari Krishna Leela Prasad Paladugu, C/o. B. Narsing Rao & Co., LLP, Plot No.554, Road No.92, MLA Colony, Jubilee Hills – 500096, Hyderabad. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 6(1), Hyderabad.

More judgments on Section 271D

All 1,725 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271D →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →