Income Tax : Discover the implications of Income Tax Act Section 270A and penalties for under-reporting or misreporting income. Learn calculati...
Income Tax : Grounds of Appeal related to the penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act , 1961 AY 2015-16 1. In the facts and circumstances of t...
Income Tax : Learn about the penalties and prosecutions under the Income Tax Act of 1961 for various defaults and offenses. Find out the fines ...
Income Tax : Apart from penalty for various defaults, the Income-tax Act also contains provisions for launching prosecution proceedings against...
Income Tax : Apart from levy of penalty for various defaults by the taxpayer, the Income-tax Law also contains provisions for launching prosecu...
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 : ITAT Delhi rules in favor of Grey Orange India Pvt. Ltd., allowing income tax deduction on warranty expenses. Detailed analysis of...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi rules interest income on FDs linked to SEZ business operations is deductible under Section 80IAB. Analysis of Candor Gu...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court judgment on GE Capital vs. DCIT, distinguishing under-reporting and misreporting as separate offenses, resulting ...
Income Tax : Discover the ITAT Bangalore ruling on IBM Canada Limited vs. DCIT, where salary reimbursements of seconded employees were deemed n...
Income Tax : Read the detailed analysis of ITAT Ahmedabad's order canceling penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. Co-owner sta...
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 Mumbai held that surplus on redemption of treasury bills is taxable under the head Capital Gains and not under the head ‘Profits and Gains of Business’.
ITAT’s decision favored Candor Kolkata One Hi-Tech Structures, allowing deductions under Section 80-IAB for on various incomes, including car parking, health club, food court, and interest.
ITAT Delhi held that punitive damage being allowed as negative restitution cannot be allowed as business expenditure under section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act
Bombay High Court held that plea of defect in the notice cannot be accepted as it had caused no prejudice to the assessee and the assessee “clearly understood” what was the purport and import of notice issued under section 274 read with Section 271 of the Act.
Bombay High Court held that if an irrelevant matter is not struck off in the notice, it indicates the AO’s uncertainty regarding the basis for imposing the penalty. Such ambiguity implies non-application of mind, rendering the notice invalid.
Madras High Court held that reopening of assessment invoking provisions of section 148 of the Income Tax Act inspired from a review and a change of opinion is liable to be quashed and set aside.
Kerala High Court orders revision of penalty after fresh assessment in P.M. Abdul Nazeer vs ACIT case. Details of the judgment and its implications.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that an appellate authority can exercise the power u/s. 251(1)(a) to enhance the assessment only after giving a notice for enhancement. Accordingly, enhancement by CIT(A) without issuance of notice is untenable in law.
Since the penalty was reduced from 300% to 100% of the tax sought to be evaded, assessee was entitled to the benefit of Section 279(1A) of Income Tax.
Read ITAT Mumbai order setting property allotment date as acquisition date for capital gain computation. Details of D.K. Brothers vs. ITO case and implications.
