Income Tax Penalty judiciary-2

No Section 271(1)(b) penalty if Assessment was completed U/s. 143(3)

Shiv Kumar Nayyar Vs ACIT (ITAT New Delhi)

Shiv Kumar Nayyar Vs ACIT (ITAT New Delhi) lthough the assessee in the instant case has not complied to the statutory notice issued by the AO on 5th October, 2016 fixing the case for hearing on 25th October, 2018 which is the basis for levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(b) of the Act, however, ultimately the […]...

Read More

No Section 271(1)(b) penalty if reasonable cause for non-compliance exist

Sun Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Pune)

Section 273B states that wherever there is a reasonable cause in not complying with the requirements resulting into imposition of penalty including section 271(1)(b) under consideration, the penalty needs to be deleted....

Read More

Section 271(1)(b) penalty not imposable when assessee finally complied with notice(s)

Gyan Mata Radha Satyam Kriyayog Ashram Research Institute Vs ITO (ITAT Allahabad)

Gyan Mata Radha Satyam Kriyayog Ashram Research Institute Vs ITO (ITAT Allahabad) On the one hand, the Assessing Officer has given the date of compliances in the above table whereas the penalty was imposed on the ground that the above notices were not complied by the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer has also stated that […]...

Read More

Section 271D Penalty Not Valid If Assessee Bonafidely explains Reasonable Cause

Bapujibuwa Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit VS JCIT (ITAT Pune)

Bapujibuwa Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit VS JCIT (ITAT Pune) The expression ‘reasonable cause’ has to be considered pragmatically and if the facts of the present case are examined keeping this legislative spirit in mind, we find that there were enough circumstances to show that the assessee company had acquired bona-fid...

Read More

Section 272A(2)(k) Penalty based on non–existing grounds is unsustainable

District Mining Officer Vs JCIT (TDS) (ITAT Allahabad)

District Mining Officer Vs JCIT (TDS) (ITAT Allahabad) It is noted that the Assessing Officer has initiated the penalty proceedings u/s 272A(2)(k) of the Income Tax Act for the alleged default of delivering the statement of TDS in Form 26Q within the time specified in section 200(3) read with proviso to section 206(3). In the […]...

Read More

No section 271(1)(b) Penalty if order was passed under section 143(3)

Jai Gopal Sondhi Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi)

Jai Gopal Sondhi Vs ITO (ITAT Delhi) We note that although the Assessing Officer has levied penalty in all the four cases for non-compliance of statutory notices, all the same he has proceeded to frame the assessment order u/s 143(3) of the Act. We also note that the CIT(A), while dismissing the assessees’ appeals has […]...

Read More

ITAT Deletes section 271C Penalty for Failure to Deduct TDS on LTA

Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank) Vs ACIT (ITAT Bangalore)

The issue under consideration is whether the penalty u/s 271C levied due to failure to deduct tax at source (TDS) on LTA paid to employee is justified in law?...

Read More

Mere Rejection of section 35D claim not amounts to Concealment of Income

DCIT Vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)

DCIT Vs. ICICI Bank Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether the CIT(A) is correct in deleting the penalty levied u/s 271(1)(c) on the disallowance of expenses made u/s.35D? ITAT states that, the assessee claimed deduction of preliminary expenses u/s 35D which was rejected by Ld.AO in terms of decision of Hon’ble Madr...

Read More

Section 271(1)(c) Penalty proceedings not sustainable if not specifies Limb

Balaji Telefilms Limited Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai)

Balaji Telefilms Limited Vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai) The issue under consideration is whether the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) without specifying the limb will be sustain under law? ITAT states that, it has been held by Hon’ble Court that the notice would have to specifically state the ground mentioned in Section 271(1)(c) of the Act na...

Read More

Section 271(1)(c) Penalty Justified if Assessee not Acted Bonafidely

Gangotri Textiles Ltd. Vs. DCIT (Madras High Court)

Gangotri Textiles Ltd. Vs. DCIT (Madras High Court) The issue under consideration is whether the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) levied by the assessing officer is justified in law? In the present case, the assessee did not disclose about the sale of the lands and windmill in the return of income, which was clear from the perusal […]...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (5,716)
Company Law (7,667)
Custom Duty (8,713)
DGFT (4,623)
Excise Duty (4,528)
Fema / RBI (4,815)
Finance (5,185)
Income Tax (38,424)
SEBI (4,132)
Service Tax (3,779)

Search Posts by Date

September 2021
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930