Income Tax : Resident taxpayers holding foreign assets or financial interests may be required to file returns and disclose such assets regardle...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that non-specification of the precise statutory charge under sections 270A(2) and 270A(9) violated principles o...
Income Tax : The framework outlines penalties for defaults like under-reporting, TDS failures, and non-compliance, while allowing relief where ...
Income Tax : Furnishing incorrect crypto-asset information without rectification can attract a fixed penalty. The amendment strengthens account...
Income Tax : The Finance Bill, 2026 converts key penalties for audit and reporting delays into mandatory fees. The shift aims to reduce dispute...
Corporate Law : The Budget proposes a single integrated order for assessment and penalty to avoid parallel proceedings. The key takeaway is reduce...
Income Tax : Budget 2024 reduces penalty relief period for TDS/TCS statement filing from one year to one month. Changes effective April 2025....
Income Tax : New amendments to the Black Money Act from October 2024 raise the exemption threshold for penalties on foreign assets to ₹20 lak...
Income Tax : Discover the proposed changes to Section 275 of the Income-tax Act, eliminating ambiguity in penalty imposition timelines. Effecti...
CA, CS, CMA : People are held hostage in a cyber-world with ransom in the form of Late Fees and Interest and a threat to levy penalty or to init...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that penalty for misreporting of income cannot be levied when the underlying addition is based merely on estimation ...
Income Tax : The Delhi ITAT upheld deletion of a penalty after finding that the show-cause notice failed to specify the applicable limb of Sect...
Income Tax : The assessee argued that payment of advance tax demonstrated absence of concealment. The High Court held that a subsequent conscio...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) could not survive once the Assessing Officer completed assessment under Se...
Income Tax : The ITAT Visakhapatnam reduced a penalty under Section 271(1)(b) from Rs.30,000 to Rs.10,000 after treating non-compliance with th...
Company Law : Penalty imposed on Cryo Scientific Systems for failure to maintain proper registers under Companies Act 2013. Learn more about the...
Company Law : The NFRA fines Shridhar & Associates and CA Ajay Vastani for professional misconduct in auditing RCFL's financials for FY 2018-19....
Income Tax : Order under Para 3 of the Faceless Penalty Scheme, 2021, for defining the scope of ‘Penalties’ to be assigned to the F...
Income Tax : It is a settled position that period of limitation of penalty proceedings under section 271D and 271E of the Act is governed by th...
Income Tax : It has been brought to notice of CBDT that there are conflicting interpretations of various High Courts on the issue whether the l...
The ITAT has set aside a penalty order against a taxpayer, Murmu Pankaj Kumar, ruling it was premature as the core quantum appeal was still pending before the CIT(A).
The Delhi ITAT has quashed a penalty under Section 271(1)(c), ruling that an “omnibus” no-tice that failed to specify the charge against the taxpayer was invalid and showed non-application of mind.
The ITAT Kolkata deleted a penalty under Section 271(1)(c), finding that an assessee’s retracted admission during a search was not supported by incriminating material.
The ITAT Delhi has deleted a ₹25,000 penalty under Section 271A, ruling that F&O turnover for a trader should be calculated based on ICAI’s guidance, not the Assessing Officer’s method.
ITAT Pune upholds a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act for a taxpayer’s failure to comply with statutory notices from the Assessing Officer.
The ITAT Chandigarh ruled that a show cause notice was defective and invalid, leading to the deletion of a penalty imposed on G.S. Auto Comp Pvt. Ltd.
ITAT Kolkata rules that a penalty under Section 271AAB cannot be levied if no search has been initiated on the assessee, even if a statement is made under Section 131.
The ITAT Delhi has ruled that no penalty can be sustained on estimated income, deleting the penalty levied on an individual for discrepancies found in his Form 26AS.
The ITAT Ahmedabad deleted a ₹10.61 lakh penalty against Snehalkumar Bhogilal Trivedi, ruling that a notice citing both under-reporting and misreporting of income was void due to ambiguity.
The ITAT Mumbai ruled that a penalty cannot be levied on additions made on an estimated basis. The case of Khodiyar Impex vs. ITO clarified that a 3% disallowance on alleged bogus purchases doesn’t constitute concealment of income.
