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...
Income Tax : The law now proposes a single consolidated assessment-cum-penalty order for under-reporting of income, reducing multiple proceedin...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271DA cannot be imposed when the assessment order lacks recorded satisfaction of a 26...
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 Tribunal held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be sustained when identical facts in earlier years led to deletion. ...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that penalty proceedings are invalid where the Assessing Officer does not specify whether the charge is concealment ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that omission of taxable foreign exchange gain in the return attracts penalty. It noted that disclosure during a...
Income Tax : The case involved Penalty Under Section 272A(1)(d for failure to comply with notices during assessment. The Tribunal ruled that co...
Income Tax : The Madras High Court held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed where a DTAA claim was made based on a bona fide...
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 Chandigarh ruled that a penalty notice without a specific charge is invalid, leading to the deletion of a penalty under Section 271AAB.
Cuttack ITAT cancels penalties under sections 271D and 271E, ruling that the Assessing Officer must record satisfaction in the assessment order before initiating penalty proceedings.
The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal quashes penalties for being time-barred and invalidates a reassessment notice, clarifying key tax law provisions on limitation and sanctioning authority.
The ITAT Cochin bench ruled that receiving cash for property at registration violates Section 269SS, overturning a prior decision.
Lucknow ITAT confirms penalty under section 271B, ruling that a taxpayer is responsible for timely tax audit completion and report submission, and blaming the CA is not a valid defense.
Calcutta High Court dismisses PCIT appeal, ruling penalty notice under Income Tax Act invalid due to failure to specify contravention, citing judicial precedents.
ITAT Delhi deleted penalties against Sahara India Commercial, citing a defective “omnibus” notice and a time-barred, invalid reassessment based on “borrowed satisfaction.”
ITAT Bangalore deletes ₹25.8L penalty under Section 271D as AO failed to record satisfaction in assessment order. Procedural lapse proved fatal.
Madras High Court directs CBDT to hear taxpayer before deciding on a penalty notice, citing initial improper service and a four-month delay in communication.
Delhi ITAT deleted a ₹10,000 penalty under Section 271(1)(b), finding no deliberate defiance by the assessee despite a delay in responding to a tax notice.
