DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUNTUR vs. BHRATHI CONSUMER CARE PRODUCTS PVT LTD, GUNTUR

ITA 249/VIZ/2022Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 October 2023AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)10 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the penalty order under Section 271D was invalid as the AO failed to record his satisfaction for initiating penalty proceedings in the assessment order. The Tribunal followed Supreme Court and other High Court judgments on this point.

What were the facts?

The assessee company received cash deposits of Rs. 1.74 Crores during demonetization, claimed as a loan from a director. The Assessing Officer (AO) rejected this, treating it as unexplained cash credit. Subsequently, the AO levied a penalty under Section 271D for violating Section 269SS.

What were the issues?

Whether a penalty under Section 271D can be levied without the Assessing Officer recording satisfaction in the assessment order. Whether the transaction between a director and a company falls under the ambit of Section 269SS.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 271D,Section 269SS,Section 68,Section 115BBE,Section 132,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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.

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 249/Viz/2022
C.O. No. 17/Viz/2023

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आयकर अपील"यअ"धकरण, "वशाखापटणम पीठ, "वशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी दु"वू" आर एल रे"डी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी एस बालाकृ"णन, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 249/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) DCIT, Vs. M/s. Bharathi Consumer Care Central Circle-1, Products Private Limited, 3rd Floor, Rajkamal Complex, Sy. No. 280, 281, Peddaparimi Lakshmipuram Main Road, Village, Nidumukkala Post, Guntur-522007, Guntur – 522016, Andhra Pradesh.

Andhra Pradesh. PAN: AADCB 9107 B (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) C.O. No. 17/Viz/2023 (In आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 249/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) M/s. Bharathi Consumer Care Vs. DCIT, Products Private Limited, Central Circle-1, Sy. No. 280, 281, Peddaparimi 3rd Floor, Rajkamal Complex, Village, Nidumukkala Post, Lakshmipuram Main Road, Guntur – 522016, Guntur-522007, Andhra Pradesh.

Andhra Pradesh. PAN: AADCB 9107 B (Cross Objector) (Appellant in appeal) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee by : Sri M.V. Prasad, AR ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue by : Dr.

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 271D

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →