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 Kolkata allows appeal, deletes Rs. 1,99,911 penalty imposed under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act for commission income estimation dispute.
ITAT held that disallowances based on estimations do not constitute underreporting of income and thus are not grounds for a penalty under Section 270A.
ITAT Ahmedabad deletes penalty on Shree Gunatit Jyot Mahila Trust for a bona fide error in deduction claim on building construction expenses.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that merely making a claim that is not sustainable does not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. Accordingly, penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act not justified.
Learn about Section 270A introduced in Finance Act 2016, effective from April 1, 2017, outlining penalties for under-reporting and misreporting of income.
Explore why penalties should not be imposed on estimated income, supported by legal rulings and principles ensuring fair tax administration.
When an assessee voluntarily discloses income and the assessment is based on this disclosure without any changes, imposing a penalty under Section 271(1)(c) is unjustified.
Penalties under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed based on estimated additions without concrete evidence of concealment or inaccurate particulars of income.
ITAT Mumbai removes penalty imposed on Sunil Bhagwandas Vorani (HUF) as addition was made on estimation basis, not due to concealment.
Delhi HC: No penalty for New Holland Tractors if assessee’s contention was plausible and bona fide, provided full disclosure of facts. Legal interpretations may vary.
