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 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 : The assessee argued that payment of advance tax demonstrated absence of concealment. The High Court held that a subsequent conscio...
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 delay of 33 months in filing appeal before Commissioner condoned on account of reasonable cause and outbreak of Covid-19. However, an amount of Rs. 51,000 directed to be deposited in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund (PMNRF).
Discover how the ITAT Delhi ruled on penalty proceedings, emphasizing the importance of a precise notice specifying the offense under Section 271(1)(c).
ITAT Ahmedabad deleted the addition towards unexplained cash credit as AO failed to conduct independent inquiry and addition was made merely for the reason that there was minor difference in amount of cash deposited vis-à-vis amount of demand draft and amount of invoice.
ITAT Mumbai held that as the assessee should be aware of the exact charge for which the penalty proceeding has been initiated, non-striking on the irrelevant limb under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act vitiates the entire penalty proceedings.
Gujarat High Court held that initiation of penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act in the absence of any material to establish the concealing of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars unsustainable-in-law.
Jharkhand High Court held that initiation of prosecution proceedings under section 276CC of the Income Tax Act in absence of any demand, as demand adjusted against refund, is bad-in-law and liable to be set aside.
Mumbai ITAT deletes penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act on estimated quantum addition based on information from Sales Tax Department. Full text order.
ITAT Pune case Shivaji Dattatray Sonawane vs ITO. Explore why the penalty for inaccuracy can’t be levied if the notice was for concealment.
Understand the condonation of delay imposed by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Standard Chartered Grindlays Pty Ltd. Learn about the penalty imposed and the background of the appeal under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
The ITAT Delhi cancels a penalty imposed on Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd. due to an unqualified offense notice. Learn about the case and its implications.
