Income Tax : The Tribunal held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed when errors are voluntarily corrected during assessment. ...
Income Tax : A summary of key penalties under the Income Tax Act for AY 2026-27, covering defaults from late filing and non-payment to misrepor...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi held penalty u/s 271(1)(c) unsustainable as 54F exemption failed due to builder delay, not taxpayer’s fault. Full dis...
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 : Learn how taxpayers can defer income tax penalty proceedings when quantum additions are under appeal. Understand legal grounds and...
Income Tax : The Committee recommends that the scope of Section 273B should be suitably enlarged to provide that penalty for concealment of inc...
Income Tax : The case addressed ambiguity in penalty proceedings where the specific charge was not identified. The Court upheld deletion of pen...
Income Tax : The case involved an ambiguous penalty notice that did not clarify whether the charge was concealment or inaccurate particulars. T...
Income Tax : The case involved penalty on disallowance of purchases treated as non-genuine and estimated at 12.5%. Tribunal ruled that estimate...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai remanded ₹95.81 lakh commission disallowance, holding that non-response to Section 133(6) notices alone cannot justi...
Income Tax : ITAT Mumbai held that CIT(A) cannot enhance income by introducing a new issue not examined by the Assessing Officer. The ruling cl...
Income Tax : 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...
ITAT Rajkot cancels penalty on Anil Odedara, ruling income was estimated and not grounds for concealment under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
ITAT Mumbai deleted a penalty, citing a defective notice under section 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c), following the Bombay High Court’s ruling in Mohd. Farhan A. Shaikh.
ITAT Mumbai cancels penalty on Smita Ashok Thakkar citing invalid notice under Section 271(1)(c) due to non-striking of relevant limb in penalty notice.
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 Surat rules no penalty under Section 271(1)(c) if income is assessed on estimate. Penalty deleted as disallowances were based on turnover estimation.
ITAT Raipur held that due to non-response for assessee if addition of income is done as Form 26AS then obviously TDS credit available in Form 26AS needs also to be allowed. Thus, appeal partly allowed.
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.
ITAT Jaipur quashes penalty under Section 271E of the Income Tax Act in Anil Sharma vs. ITO due to absent recorded satisfaction.
ITAT Delhi held that Transfer Pricing Adjustment in respect of transaction of payment of royalty is set aside and Transfer Pricing Officer [TPO] is directed to accept the parameters of determination of compensation as accepted in Advance Pricing Agreement [APA].
ITAT Ahmedabad allows appeal despite 1607-day delay citing medical hardship. Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) questioned over income assessment.
