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 cancels a ₹40,000 penalty on a co-operative society, citing a reasonable cause for non-compliance, including PAN issues and the COVID-19 pandemic.
The ITAT Kolkata quashed a penalty on a taxpayer, ruling that a one-time settlement from an employer was a capital receipt. The court held that no concealment of income occurred as the amount was disclosed in the tax return.
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Cochin has ruled that voluntarily disclosing additional income after a search notice does not automatically justify a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
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.
