MAHESHKUMAR LALJIDAS PATEL,VISNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1 PATAN, PATAN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1021/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 August 2025AY 2013-14Bench: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

Given that the penalty proceedings under Section 271D were already remanded for de novo consideration and the inter-related nature of Sections 271D and 271E, the Tribunal remanded the penalty proceedings under Section 271E to the JCIT. The JCIT is to conduct fresh proceedings and decide on levying or dropping the penalty after considering the assessee's submissions.

What were the facts?

The assessee was subjected to a penalty under Section 271E of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for cash repayment of a loan totaling Rs. 5,79,075/-. The assessee appealed, arguing a violation of natural justice due to lack of reasonable opportunity to be heard and that the penalty under Section 271E should not stand if the connected Section 271D penalty is not sustainable.

What were the issues?

Whether the penalty under Section 271E was imposed in violation of natural justice, specifically regarding the right to be heard, and its sustainability given the remand of the related Section 271D penalty.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271E,Section 271D,Section 274

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Gohil, AR
For Respondent: Shri Prateek Sharma, Sr. DR
Hearing: 05.08.2025Pronounced: 25.08.2025

आदेश की �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :

More judgments on Section 271E

All 968 judgments and leading authorities on Section 271E →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →