section 271(1)(c)

How to Tackle the Notice Issued u/s 271(1)(c)

Income Tax - For invoking the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, satisfaction of the concerned income tax authority is must that any person has:- Either concealed particulars of his income OR Furnished inaccurate particulars of such income and such satisfaction must be arrived at in the course of any proceeding under the Act. Satis...

Read More

Penalties and Prosecutions Under Income tax Act, 1961

Income Tax - Penalties and Prosecutions Default in complying with provisions of or with conditions prescribed under the Income-tax Act would attract certain penalty and in critical cases prosecutions as well. The document will provide you information about the punishable offences, prosecutions and the quantum of penalties that can be imposed under the...

Read More

Prosecutions and Punishment under Income-Tax Act, 1961

Income Tax - Apart from penalty for various defaults, the Income-tax Act also contains provisions for launching prosecution proceedings against the taxpayers for various offences. In this part you can gain knowledge about the various provisions relating to prosecution which can be launched under the Income-tax Act....

Read More

All about Income Tax Offences liable to prosecution

Income Tax - Apart from levy of penalty for various defaults by the taxpayer, the Income-tax Law also contains provisions for launching prosecution for offences committed by the taxpayer. In this part you can gain knowledge about offences in respect of which prosecutions can be launched under the Income-tax Law. For provisions relating to punishment c...

Read More

Power of Commissioner to Reduce or Waive Income Tax Penalty

Income Tax - In the tutorial on Penalties Under the Income-tax Act, we discussed various penalties imposable under the Income-tax Act in respect of various defaults. Apart from enacting penalty provisions...

Read More

Easwar Committee Recommends Non-Levy Of Penalty in certain circumstances

Income Tax - The Committee recommends that the scope of Section 273B should be suitably enlarged to provide that penalty for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars thereof will not be imposed where any addition or disallowance is made without any evidence or in a routine manner or on estimate and in cases where the Assessing Office...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) not sustainable on failure of AO to strike off inappropriate words in show-cause notice U/s. 274

Ratan Kumar Paul Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata) - Where show cause notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) did not specify charge against assessee as to whether it was for concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, levy of penalty could no be sustained....

Read More

Making incorrect claim in law would not by itself make assessee liable to penalty U/s. 271(1)(c)

CIT Vs L & T Finance Ltd. (Bombay High Court) - Making of incorrect claim in law would not by itself amount to concealment of income or giving inaccurate particulars of income. Since revenue had not been able to show even remotely that there was any concealment of income or filing of inaccurate particulars of income, appeal was to be dismissed....

Read More

No penalty on excess depreciation claim for bona fide reasons

DCIT Vs Federal Brands Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) - An excess claim of depreciation by an assessee for bonafide reasons would not justify imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) had also been deliberated upon by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Somany Evergreen Knits Ltd. (2013) 352 ITR 592 (Bom.)...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) not sustainable on deletion of addition for relevant expenses

DCIT Vs Prabhudas Liladhar P. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) - Prabhudas Liladhar P. Ltd. Case: Once The Whole Basis Of Addition Itself As Made By The AO In Quantum Has Been Deleted By The Tribunal And Expenses Were Related To The Business Penalty Levied By The AO Under Section 271(1)(c) Deleted...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed for non deduction of TDS

Netambit Value First Services (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) - Merely because assessee-company had claimed deduction of expenditure without deducting TDS on interest payment, which was not accepted by Revenue, by itself, would not attract the levy of penalty....

Read More

Immunity under Section 270AA of Income-tax Act, 1961- CBDT Clarifies

Circular No 5/2018-Income Tax - (16/08/2018) - Section 270AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) inter alia provides that w.e.f. 1 st April, 2017, the Assessing Officer, on an application made by an assessee, may grant immunity from imposition of penalty under section 270A (not being penalty for misreporting) and initiation of proceedings unde...

Read More

Recent Posts in "section 271(1)(c)"

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) not sustainable on failure of AO to strike off inappropriate words in show-cause notice U/s. 274

Ratan Kumar Paul Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)

Where show cause notice issued under section 274 read with section 271(1)(c) did not specify charge against assessee as to whether it was for concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income, levy of penalty could no be sustained....

Read More

Making incorrect claim in law would not by itself make assessee liable to penalty U/s. 271(1)(c)

CIT Vs L & T Finance Ltd. (Bombay High Court)

Making of incorrect claim in law would not by itself amount to concealment of income or giving inaccurate particulars of income. Since revenue had not been able to show even remotely that there was any concealment of income or filing of inaccurate particulars of income, appeal was to be dismissed....

Read More

No penalty on excess depreciation claim for bona fide reasons

DCIT Vs Federal Brands Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)

An excess claim of depreciation by an assessee for bonafide reasons would not justify imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) had also been deliberated upon by the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT vs. Somany Evergreen Knits Ltd. (2013) 352 ITR 592 (Bom.)...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) not sustainable on deletion of addition for relevant expenses

DCIT Vs Prabhudas Liladhar P. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai)

Prabhudas Liladhar P. Ltd. Case: Once The Whole Basis Of Addition Itself As Made By The AO In Quantum Has Been Deleted By The Tribunal And Expenses Were Related To The Business Penalty Levied By The AO Under Section 271(1)(c) Deleted...

Read More

Penalty U/s. 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed for non deduction of TDS

Netambit Value First Services (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi)

Merely because assessee-company had claimed deduction of expenditure without deducting TDS on interest payment, which was not accepted by Revenue, by itself, would not attract the levy of penalty....

Read More

How to Tackle the Notice Issued u/s 271(1)(c)

For invoking the provisions of section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, satisfaction of the concerned income tax authority is must that any person has:- Either concealed particulars of his income OR Furnished inaccurate particulars of such income and such satisfaction must be arrived at in the course of any proceeding under the Act. Satis...

Read More
Posted Under: Income Tax |

S. 271(1)(c) No Penalty if returned and assessed income are same

Armoury International Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai)

Armoury International Vs ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) In this case, the assessee was observed to have made bogus purchases as per information received from the Sales Tax Department. The assessee was issued notice u/s. 148 on 11.03.2013 served on 12.03.2013. The assessee filed revised return of income on 15.03.2013, wherein the amount of bogus purc...

Read More

Penalty cannot be imposed based on Original Return in Section 153A Assessment

M/s OSE Infrastructure Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi)

M/s OSE Infrastructure Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Delhi) When the revised return is accepted and the income is assessed as per the revised income, there is no scope for penalty. In the case of Kirit Dahyabhai Patel vs ACIT, (2017) 80 Taxmann.com 162 (Guj), the Hon’ble High Court held that in view of specific provision of Section […]...

Read More

Penalty imposed not sustainable if Quantum Assessment itself quashed

ITO Vs Shri Anilkumar G. Darji (ITAT Ahmedabad)

Since basis for visiting assessee with penalty has been extinguished by quashing assessment order itself by Tribunal in appeal of assessee, impugned penalty imposed further had no leg to stand....

Read More

Penalty not leviable If Assessee acted in terms of law prevailing at relevant point of time

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs  Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd. (High Court Madras)

CIT Vs  Chettinad Cement Corporation Ltd. (High Court Madras) n order to get over the legal embargo which permitted such expense to be allowable as a deduction, the Income Tax Act was amended and Section 35DDA was introduced by Finance Act, 2001 w.e.f 01.04.2001. Thus, in our considered view, the Tribunal was justified in setting aside ...

Read More

Browse All Categories

CA, CS, CMA (4,008)
Company Law (4,287)
Custom Duty (7,177)
DGFT (3,843)
Excise Duty (4,175)
Fema / RBI (3,581)
Finance (3,801)
Income Tax (28,784)
SEBI (3,033)
Service Tax (3,422)

Search Posts by Date

February 2019
M T W T F S S
« Jan    
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728