Income Tax : This guide explains the penalty and prosecution framework under the Income-tax Act for AY 2026-27. It highlights the consequences ...
Income Tax : The article explains how offences such as wilful tax evasion, failure to file returns, non-payment of TDS/TCS, falsification of re...
Income Tax : This article outlines major offences under the Income-tax Act that may result in prosecution, including tax evasion, non-payment o...
Income Tax : The law now proposes a single consolidated assessment-cum-penalty order for under-reporting of income, reducing multiple proceedin...
Income Tax : Understand why an income-tax penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is invalid if the charge isn't specified as concealment or inaccurate...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot survive when the AO accepts the income declared in the return filed ...
Income Tax : Bombay High Court held penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot survive where bogus purchase addition is sustained only on an estima...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that a deduction claim supported by prevailing judicial precedents cannot attract Section 270A penalty merely bec...
Income Tax : The High Court held that failure to pass the order giving effect within the time prescribed under Section 153 resulted in abatemen...
Income Tax : The Delhi High Court held that immunity under Section 270AA could not be denied when the penalty notice did not specify whether th...
ITAT Mumbai cancels penalty on Smita Ashok Thakkar citing invalid notice under Section 271(1)(c) due to non-striking of relevant limb in penalty notice.
ITAT Mumbai cancels Section 271(1)(c) penalties on Lyka Labs Ltd for AYs 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2014-15 due to procedural defect in the penalty notices.
ITAT Pune cancels Section 270A penalty against Kasat Prakash M (HUF) due to non-specification of legal grounds in AO’s notice under the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Pune cancels penalties under Section 270A due to procedural lapses in AO’s notices, citing failure to specify relevant clauses of misreporting.
ITAT Pune removes Section 270A penalties due to defect in penalty notice lacking reference to specific misreporting clause. Appeals allowed for two assessment years.
ITAT Pune deletes Section 270A penalty on salaried assessee due to lack of specific clause in penalty notice and reliance on tax consultant’s actions.
ITAT Surat rules no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) if income is assessed on estimate. Penalty deleted as disallowances were based on turnover estimation.
ITAT Ahmedabad allows appeal despite 1607-day delay citing medical hardship. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) questioned over income assessment.
ITAT Ahmedabad cancels penalty on I-Serve Systems as disallowance was based on estimation without proof of concealment or inaccurate income details.
ITAT Surat rules penalty under Section 271(1)(c) not sustainable where income addition is based on estimation of bogus purchases.
