Supreme Court Directs Implementation of Rs 2 Lakh Limit on Cash Transactions:

Supreme Court Directs Implementation of Rs 2 Lakh Limit on Cash Transactions The Supreme Court highlighted concerns regarding the poor enforcement of provisions of the Finance Act 2017, which put a limit of Rs. 2 lakh on cash transactions. On Tuesday, it said that when there is a law, it has to be implemented. The Supreme Court issued many instructions and stated that whenever such a case is filed, courts must inform the relevant Income Tax authority, which should then take necessary legal action. Under the Finance Act 2027, the government banned cash transactions of Rs 2 lakh and above from April 1, 2017. A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan was hearing a case about the ownership of a property, where it was claimed that Rs 75 lakh was paid via cash in advance on April 10, 2018. The Supreme Court said the litigation raises doubts and violates the law as well. It instructed that whenever a case is filed where it claims that Rs. 2 lakh and more is paid in cash against any transaction, the court is required to inform the jurisdictional Income Tax Department to check the transaction and the violation of Section 269ST of the Income Tax Act. Despite the law coming into effect on April 1, 2017, the Supreme Court pointed out that the situation in this case shows it hasn't worked as expected. The court stated that when a law is made, it must be implemented. In many cases, such transactions escape the eyes of income tax authorities. Ignoring the facts can be forgiven, but ignoring the law cannot be forgiven. The court further added that Section 269ST of the Income Tax Act was implemented to control black money by making transactions above Rs 2 lakh digital. It also includes a penalty under Section 271DA for violations. The bench said that if any Income Tax Authority gets to know that Rs 2 lakh or more has been paid in cash for a property transaction, whether from another source or during a search or assessment, the failure of the registering authority to report this must be brought to the Chief Secretary of the State/UT. Appropriate disciplinary action should then be taken against the officer who failed to report the transaction.