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...
Section 271AAB penalties will not apply to searches initiated under Section 132 after September 1, 2024, as per the Finance Bill, 2025.
Finance Bill 2025 rationalizes the time-limit for imposing penalties under section 275 of the Income-tax Act, setting a uniform limit of six months.
Post-Finance Bill 2025, penalties under specified sections of the Income-tax Act will be levied by the Assessing Officer, with Joint Commissioner approval for higher amounts.
Penalty under Section 271AAB of the Income-tax Act is not applicable for searches after 1st September 2024, replaced by Section 158BFA penalty.
Read the full text of the ITAT Bangalore order in the DACSS Granites Pvt. Ltd. case. The tribunal rules that immunity under Section 270AA(2) cannot be denied due to a belated Form-68 application.
ITAT Ahmedabad dismisses penalty for disallowance of deduction under section 80IA(4), ruling in favor of the assessee as a developer.
ITAT Mumbai rules that penalty cannot be maintained after assessment order is quashed, restoring a case to CIT(A) for fresh hearing.
ITAT Delhi upholds penalty under Section 271(1)(b) against Sanjay Dalmia for not signing consent waiver form related to undisclosed HSBC bank account details.
ITAT Delhi ruled in Rekha Rani vs. DCIT that penalty under Section 271(1)(b) cannot be imposed for each non-compliance of Section 143(2) notices, only for the first default.
ITAT Delhi quashes Section 271(1)(b) penalty against Charu Modi Bhartia, citing lack of evidence on alleged foreign bank account ownership with HSBC Geneva.
