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...
PCIT vs. Minu Bakshi: Delhi High Court Clarifies No Penalty if notice for the imposition of penalty did not specify particular limb of Section 271(1)(c) under which penalty was levied.
CIT (Exemptions) Vs Jamnalal Bajaj Foundation, Delhi High Court emphasized that penalty notice must specify precise limb of Section 271(1)(c) under which penalty is imposed.
ITAT has deleted the entire addition and disallowance based for imposition of penalty, the penalty imposed so cannot continue and therefore, deserves to be deleted in full with reference to aforesaid the addition & disallowance.
In PCIT Vs Bhudeva Estate Pvt. Ltd., Delhi High Court emphasized that notices for penalty under Section 271(1)(c) must explicitly specify grounds for penalty imposition.
Delhi High Court dismisses Departmental appeal on penalty case PCIT vs Gopal Kumar Goyal. Analysis of failure to clarify grounds, AY 2004-05. Full judgment included
In the case of D.C. Polyester Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITAT Mumbai), penalty under section 270A was contested for changing income head. Detailed analysis and outcome explained.
Mumbai ITAT deletes penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on estimated quantum addition based on information from Sales Tax Department. Full text order.
ITAT Pune case Shivaji Dattatray Sonawane vs ITO. Explore why the penalty for inaccuracy can’t be levied if the notice was for concealment.
Understand the condonation of delay imposed by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Standard Chartered Grindlays Pty Ltd. Learn about the penalty imposed and the background of the appeal under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
The ITAT Delhi cancels a penalty imposed on Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd. due to an unqualified offense notice. Learn about the case and its implications.
