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 case addressed ambiguity in penalty proceedings where the specific charge was not identified. The Court upheld deletion of pen...
Income Tax : The case involved an ambiguous penalty notice that did not clarify whether the charge was concealment or inaccurate particulars. T...
Income Tax : The case involved penalty on disallowance of purchases treated as non-genuine and estimated at 12.5%. Tribunal ruled that estimate...
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 ...
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...
ITAT Pune deletes Section 270A penalty on salaried assessee due to lack of specific clause in penalty notice and reliance on tax consultant’s actions.
ITAT Surat rules penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) must be limited to first default, not per notice. Penalty reduced to ₹10,000 due to partial non-compliance.
ITAT Surat rules no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) if income is assessed on estimate. Penalty deleted as disallowances were based on turnover estimation.
ITAT Kolkata removes ₹1 crore penalty under Sec 271E, ruling cash transaction between sister concerns as reimbursement, not loan repayment.
ITAT rulings highlight that an unsigned notice is legally invalid, undermining the Assessing Officer’s jurisdiction and any penalties for non-compliance.
ITAT Ahmedabad ruled against penalty under 270A for misreporting income, citing correct filing and tax payment after notice. Case details.
ITAT Pune remands penalty case, citing pending quantum appeal before CIT(A). Decision on under-reporting penalty deferred.
Provisions of Section 44AB, which mandate Tax audit, are not applicable to fictional income provisions like Section section 68, 69, 69A, 69B, 69C& 69D
ITAT Pune held that penalty under section 270A is not leviable since neither the assessment order nor the notice issued u/sec.274 r.w.s.270A the Assessing Officer has specified the limb under which the case of the assessee falls.
ITAT Jaipur quashes penalty under Section 271E of the Income Tax Act in Anil Sharma vs. ITO due to absent recorded satisfaction.
