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...
ITAT Chennai rules that debatable tax claims made in good faith do not warrant penalties under Section 270A of the Income Tax Act. Read the case details.
Simplified penalty timelines under Section 275 effective April 2025, including changes in penalty powers, omissions, and clarifications on Section 271AAB.
ITAT Bangalore held that that mens rea is not an essential condition for imposing penalties under civil acts. Penalty u/s. 270A of the Income Tax Act nowhere specifically refers necessity of presence of mens rea for levy of penalty. Accordingly, appeal of revenue allowed.
ITAT Delhi quashes penalty on Babu Ram u/s 271(1)(c) as barred by limitation. Penalty order dated April 1, 2022, violated extended timelines due to COVID-19.
ITAT Pune rules in Ramchandra Jadhavrao vs. ACIT that no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) applies if income is declared in return post-survey.
ITAT Mumbai rules that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act cannot be levied on ad-hoc estimated income, dismissing Revenue’s appeal in ITO vs. Ashok Industrial Corporation.
ITAT Mumbai ruled on Dev Engineers Vs DCIT, deleting penalties under Sections 271(1)(c) and 271AAB. Additions were based on estimation, lacking evidence of concealment.
ITAT Jaipur quashes 271D penalty against Balbir Singh, ruling funds received were advances, not loans, after verifying property ownership.
Appeal against penalty under Section 271(1)(b) citing ill health, lack of awareness of Faceless Scheme, and procedural lapses. Request for deletion based on valid grounds.
Section 115BBE imposes a high tax rate on unexplained income to prevent tax evasion. Learn about tax rates, penalties, and compliance strategies.
