Income Tax : Discover penalties and prosecutions under the Income Tax Act, 1961, including default conditions, quantum of penalties, and potent...
Finance : Learn about Section 270A introduced in Finance Act 2016, effective from April 1, 2017, outlining penalties for under-reporting and...
Income Tax : Explore why penalties should not be imposed on estimated income, supported by legal rulings and principles ensuring fair tax admin...
Income Tax : Discover the implications of Income Tax Act Section 270A and penalties for under-reporting or misreporting income. Learn calculati...
Income Tax : Apart from penalty for various defaults, the Income-tax Act also contains provisions for launching prosecution proceedings against...
Income Tax : ITAT Visakhapatnam sets aside penalty on Malla Appalaraju under Section 271(1)(c) due to a defective notice, ruling it void ab ini...
Income Tax : ITAT Visakhapatnam ruled no penalty for voluntary income disclosure post-survey, rejecting AO's concealment claims....
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai deletes penalty under Section 271(1)(c) on estimated GP additions for alleged bogus purchases in Om Sai Traders case f...
Income Tax : ITAT Pune rules in Ramchandra Jadhavrao vs. ACIT that no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) applies if income is declared in return p...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai rules that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act cannot be levied on ad-hoc estimated income, dismissi...
ITAT Visakhapatnam sets aside penalty on Malla Appalaraju under Section 271(1)(c) due to a defective notice, ruling it void ab initio.
ITAT Visakhapatnam ruled no penalty for voluntary income disclosure post-survey, rejecting AO’s concealment claims.
ITAT Mumbai deletes penalty under Section 271(1)(c) on estimated GP additions for alleged bogus purchases in Om Sai Traders case for AY 2010-11 & 2011-12.
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 Chandigarh rules against penalty on estimated income in AKM Resorts vs ACIT, reinforcing that additions based on estimation don’t imply income concealment.
Bombay High Court affirms ITAT’s decision, upholding a penalty on Veena Estate under Section 271(1)(c) for inaccurate income disclosures in a real estate transaction.
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.
