HomeDirect TaxSub-Registrar Must Inform Income Tax Dept if Over Rs. 2 Lakh Paid...

Sub-Registrar Must Inform Income Tax Dept if Over Rs. 2 Lakh Paid in Cash Before FIR? Allahabad HC Issues Notice 

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Allahabad High Court has issued the notice to government on a plea challenging FIR where it was lodged directly on the alleged cash payment of Rs.2,00,000 or more without informing the income tax department as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of the Correspondence, RBANMS Educational Institution vs. B. Gunashekar and Another.

The bench of Justice Praveen Kumar Giri while listing the matter on 10.03.2026 directed the state to file the counter affidavit.

The applicant submits that Section 269ST of the Income Tax Act, 1961 prohibits any person from receiving Rs.2,00,000/- or more in cash from a single person in a day or in a single transaction or in respect of one event or occasion. 

The applicant further submitted that where more than Rs.2,00,000/- is paid in cash in a registered deed, the Sub-Registrar shall inform the Income-tax Department. He places reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Correspondence, RBANMS Educational Institution vs. B. Gunashekar and Another, 2025 INSC 490, wherein it has been held that the court/authority shall inform the Income-tax Department if any cash payment of Rs.2,00,000/- or more is involved. 

The applicant submitted that before lodging the F.I.R., the process should be completed and, an amount of more than Rs.20,00,000/- is alleged to have been given in cash to the applicant.

The court listed the matter on 10.03.2026.

Case Details

Case Title: Nikhil Mittal Versus State of U.P. and Another

Case No.: APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. – 5276 of 2026

Date: 23/02/2026

Counsel For Petitioner: Ram Adhar Yadav, Satendra Kumar

Counsel For Respondent: G.A.

Read More: Forfeiture of Security Deposit Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Service Tax on TV Serial Production Despite Perpetual Copyright Assignment Upheld: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench has upheld a...

Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation, Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench, has held that...

Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Without Proof of Suppression: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand on Real Estate Agent 

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench has held that...

Mere Sale of Advertisement Space Not Taxable as Advertising Agency Service: CESTAT 

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai Bench has held that the...

More like this

Service Tax on TV Serial Production Despite Perpetual Copyright Assignment Upheld: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench has upheld a...

Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation, Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench, has held that...

Limitation Can’t Be Invoked Without Proof of Suppression: CESTAT Quashes Service Tax Demand on Real Estate Agent 

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Chennai Bench has held that...