Income Tax : Discover the implications of Income Tax Act Section 270A and penalties for under-reporting or misreporting income. Learn calculati...
Income Tax : Learn about the penalties and prosecutions under the Income Tax Act of 1961 for various defaults and offenses. Find out the fines ...
Income Tax : Apart from penalty for various defaults, the Income-tax Act also contains provisions for launching prosecution proceedings against...
Income Tax : Apart from levy of penalty for various defaults by the taxpayer, the Income-tax Law also contains provisions for launching prosecu...
Income Tax : Arjuna, while playing on the Football Ground if, a player pushes other players or creates any obstruction then the referee whistle...
Income Tax : Delhi HC: No penalty for New Holland Tractors if assessee's contention was plausible and bona fide, provided full disclosure of fa...
Income Tax : Read the detailed analysis of ITAT Ahmedabad's order canceling penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. Co-owner sta...
Income Tax : xplore DCIT Vs Polyplex Corp. Limited case. Learn why penalty for disallowed tax claim isn't justified. Details & key takeaways he...
Income Tax : Can penalty under Section 271(1)(c) be imposed if self-assessment tax was paid before notice u/s 148? Read the detailed analysis o...
Income Tax : Tribunal ruled that mere disallowance of expenses or enhancement of returned income does not automatically warrant the imposition ...
Detailed analysis of the ITAT Delhi judgement in Kamlesh Gupta Vs DCIT case where the tribunal ruled that addition made on estimated profit does not constitute concealment, hence, no penalty.
Read about the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s decision to allow a writ petition challenging a penalty order that violated the principles of natural justice. Get a comprehensive analysis of the case and its implications.
ITAT Delhi holds in the Sabharwal Food Industries Vs DCIT case that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be levied simply because a claim was not accepted. Discover more about this landmark ruling.
Comprehensive analysis of the ITAT Delhi’s decision in Gulab Impex Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT, affirming that mere acceptance of disallowance does not necessarily constitute furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.
A deep dive into ITAT Mumbai’s ruling in I.G. International Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, underscoring the importance of unambiguous notices under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
In Sunrise Broking P. Ltd. Vs ITO, ITAT Ahmedabad abolishes penalty over additions made to interest on income tax refund, recognizing no concealment or inaccuracy in the income particulars.
An in-depth look at the ITAT Dehradun ruling in Saraswati Dynamics Pvt Ltd Vs ACIT, highlighting the importance of specifying the grounds for penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act. Explore how the tribunal’s decision impacts tax jurisprudence
ITAT Mumbai held that penalty u/s 271(1)(c) not leviable as mere making of a claim which is not sustainable in law by itself will not amount to furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income.
A comprehensive analysis of the landmark ITAT Delhi case, Sushila Goyal Vs ITO, highlighting the tribunal’s stance on penalty under Section 271(1)(c) when additions are made on an estimated basis.
ITAT Ahmedabad case between Standard Radiators Pvt Ltd and ACIT, involving an inaccurate income penalty dispute related to interest expense misclassification
