Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that penalty under Section 270A cannot be levied merely because income was estimated after rejection of books. Si...
Income Tax : The article explains how transactions between associated domestic entities exceeding ₹20 crore must comply with arm's length pri...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that non-specification of the precise statutory charge under sections 270A(2) and 270A(9) violated principles o...
Income Tax : Budget 2026 proposes allowing taxpayers to file an updated return even after receiving a reassessment notice under Section 148. Wh...
Income Tax : Explore amendments to section 253 of Income-tax Act, adjusting time limits for filing appeals to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held that IT, salary and travel reimbursements without any profit element were not taxable and deleted the disallowance...
Income Tax : ITAT held that an Assessing Officer cannot substitute the DCF method chosen under Rule 11UA with the NAV method without legal just...
Income Tax : ITAT held ₹33 crore settled rights over the entire land, allowing full indexed acquisition cost and rejecting proportionate rest...
Income Tax : ITAT excluded EDCIL, Just Dial, Info Edge and India Exposition Mart as transfer pricing comparables due to functional differences ...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that a penalty notice lacking a specific allegation of under-reporting, misreporting, or the applicable clause ...
Gujarat High Court examines the procedure for faceless income tax assessment and the assessee’s right to a personal hearing via video conference under Section 144B.
ITAT Pune sets aside penalty on Kishor Patil under Section 270A, citing lack of clarity in notice and non-specification of misreporting conditions.
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 Ahmedabad ruled against penalty under 270A for misreporting income, citing correct filing and tax payment after notice. Case details.
ITAT Pune remands penalty case, citing pending quantum appeal before CIT(A). Decision on under-reporting penalty deferred.
ITAT Pune held that penalty under section 270A is not leviable since neither the assessment order nor the notice issued u/sec.274 r.w.s.270A the Assessing Officer has specified the limb under which the case of the assessee falls.
