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 : Tribunal held that reassessment beyond three years was not permissible where alleged escaped income was only ₹38 lakh. Since sta...
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 : 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 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.
Indore ITAT clarifies that a firm can’t deny land ownership if bought through directors. Read the detailed analysis of Bagora Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs ACIT case.
ITAT Delhi held that revisional jurisdiction u/s. 263 of the Income Tax Act not invocable in absence of any error or infirmity in the assessment order which could make the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.
Read how ITAT Delhi deleted penalty u/s 271AAB of the Income Tax Act due to a defective notice in Landcraft Developers (Pvt.) Ltd Vs ACIT case.
Explore the case of DCIT Vs Platinum Towers Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Delhi) regarding personal expenses treated as income, penalties under Section 269SS, and conclusions on the matter.
ITAT Delhi rules against penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for inaccurate income particulars from property sale, emphasizing legal and factual clarity.
Learn from the Bombay High Court’s judgment why actual agricultural activity isn’t crucial in determining land as agricultural, impacting tax liabilities.
Read the detailed analysis of ITAT Delhi’s decision to delete additions made on cash salary payments without proper documentation in Vaibhav Jain Vs DCIT case.
ITAT Kolkata decision: No penalty under Section 271(1)(c) for Kalna II CADP Farmers Service Co-Op. Society after deletion of the addition basis for penalty.
Suryshree Blocks Pvt. Ltd. vs DCIT: ITAT Ahmedabad overturns penalty under Sec 271(1)(c) of Income Tax Act due to failure to find any particulars inaccurate. Analysis provided.
