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 Tribunal held that penalty was not justified where all relevant facts were disclosed in the return of income, audit report, an...
Income Tax : The Delhi ITAT upheld deletion of a penalty after finding that the show-cause notice failed to specify the applicable limb of Sect...
Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that unsecured loan additions could not be sustained where the assessee furnished confirmations, bank statemen...
Income Tax : The Bangalore ITAT held that a disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D cannot survive without the Assessing Officer recor...
Income Tax : The Tribunal found no distinguishing factors between the assessee and another liquor trader whose GP rate of 3.13% had been accept...
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...
AC Chokshi Share Brokers Pvt Ltd appeals against disallowed legal expenses for out-of-court settlement & defense. ITAT Mumbai orders readjudication. Details here.
ITAT Mumbai held that as there is complete uniformity in not charging interest from AEs and Non-AEs for delay in realization of export proceeds, addition of notional interest in respect of transactions with AEs in the course of transfer pricing proceedings unwarranted.
Explore the Bombay High Court’s ruling on PCIT vs. ICICI Bank Ltd regarding accuracy in income reporting and the deletion of penalties under Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act.
In the case of Cavalcade Properties Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT, ITAT mandates re-evaluation of advances against flat bookings, challenging revenue recognition methods.
ITAT Mumbai held that the date of the agreement by no stretch of imagination could be the date of sale of the shares by the assessee. As date of contract of sale would be date of fulfilment of conditions specified in share purchase agreement, date of contract will be treated as date of transfer.
Mumbai ITAT sets aside penalty under section 271B, citing previous penalty under section 271A for non-maintenance of accounts in Haresh Ghanshyamdas Makhija vs ITO case.
Mumbai ITAT ruled no penalty under section 271(1)(c) if bona fide mistakes in original return were corrected during assessment. Full text analysis included.
Discover ITAT Mumbais decision in S Sagar Enterprise vs DCIT, allowing refund of excess appeal fees and deletion of penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
Read the ITAT Chennai ruling in Padam J. Challani Vs ACIT case, directing AO to allow telescoping benefit and delete additions of excess gold and diamond jewellery. Full analysis and implications.
ITAT Delhi rules that no addition shall be made when commission earned from consignment sale of foodgrains is reflected in P&L account. Detailed analysis of ITO Vs Smt. Keshar Devi.
