Income Tax : Section 44AA mandates books for professionals and businesses exceeding income thresholds. Details presumptive tax rules, required ...
Income Tax : Chennai ITAT ruled a S. 271D penalty time-barred, holding that the six-month limitation period starts from the AO's recorded satis...
Income Tax : Indian tax law restricts cash transactions to promote digital payments. Limits apply to expense payments (Sec 40A(3): ₹10k/day),...
Income Tax : Detailed overview of penalties under various sections of the Income Tax Act, covering defaults in tax payment, reporting, document...
Income Tax : A summary of key penalties under the Income Tax Act for AY 2026-27, covering defaults from late filing and non-payment to misrepor...
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 : In view of Indiscriminate notices by income Tax Department without allowing reasonable time it is requested to Finance Ministry an...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held that once appellate authorities delete a penalty under Section 271(1)(c), no substantial question of law ar...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that omnibus notices issued under Section 274 r.w.s 271 were defective, invalidating penalties for AYs 2008-09...
Income Tax : ITAT condoned a significant seven-year delay in filing an appeal, recognizing assessee's status as an NRI and his lack of awarenes...
Income Tax : The ITAT Dehradun set aside a penalty under Section 270A, holding that the Assessing Officer failed to specify the exact clause of...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) was premature when the related quantum appeal was still pending, remitting...
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 Delhi has set aside a penalty imposed on a taxpayer, ruling that penalties cannot be levied on additions to income that are based on estimation. This decision follows a precedent in the same case.
ITAT Hyderabad deletes penalty u/s 271D on cash receipts for agricultural land sale, citing reasonable cause and prior rulings. Appeals allowed
The ITAT Delhi deleted a penalty levied under Section 270A against Kanodia Technoplast, ruling that the penalty order was invalid for failing to specify the nature of the offense.
ITAT Ahmedabad dismisses a PCIT’s order under Section 263, stating that revisionary powers cannot be used merely to direct the initiation of penalty proceedings.
The ITAT Agra has canceled a penalty against Bundelkhand University, ruling that a technical breach of not filing documents is not punishable if all details are later provided.
The ITAT in Rajkot reduced a penalty against a taxpayer from ₹30,000 to ₹10,000, ruling that a single penalty should be levied for multiple non-compliances that occurred during the same proceedings.
The ITAT Ahmedabad has remanded a penalty case for Co.op Credit Society, directing the AO to pass a new order only after the related quantum appeal is finalized.
Income tax penalty proceedings initiated against the company under Section271(1)(c) was quashed as no sufficient time was given for reply and a personal hearing rendered the proceedings procedurally unfair and legally unsustainable.
The Delhi High Court upheld the quashing of a penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. The court ruled that the penalty notice was invalid because it failed to specify whether the penalty was for ‘concealment of income’ or ‘furnishing inaccurate particulars’.
Pune ITAT voids Rs 1 crore penalty against Karia Builders. Tribunal rules penalty proceedings are invalid if the underlying assessment is legally flawed and highlights the need for proper sanction for reassessment notices.
