Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Smt. Subbalakshmi Kurada Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore)
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Smt. Subbalakshmi Kurada Vs DCIT (ITAT Bangalore) In , the ITAT Bangalore deleted penalty under Section 271(1)(c), holding that mere disallowance or change in head of income does not amount to concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars. The assessee had: Shown rental income partly as rent and partly as hire charges (under business income) Claimed Section 54 deduction on reinvestment made jointly with her son The AO: Reclassified hire charges as house property income Restricted Section 54 deduction Levied penalty alleging inaccurate particulars However, the Tribunal observed: All fac...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

SC Holds Guarantor Liable for Original Loan, Not Unauthorized Overdrawals Escaped Income Below ₹50 Lakh? Reopening After 3 Years Is Dead on Arrival: ITAT Quashes NRI Reassessment Software Licences Aren’t Capital Assets: ITAT Allows ₹37.87 Crore Deduction to BNP Paribas Search Surrender Doesn’t Mean Maximum Penalty: ITAT Cuts Section 271AAB Levy from 90% to 30% CBDT Delay Can’t Defeat Exemption Claim: ITAT Revives Section 10(46) Relief for Maharashtra Fee Regulator View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Ads Free tax News and Updates
Search Post by Date
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031