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 lack of awareness of the assessment order and limited knowledge of tax law constituted sufficient cause for...
Income Tax : The Tribunal held that a penalty notice lacking clarity on whether it relates to concealment or inaccurate particulars is invalid....
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 : 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 held that penalty notice under section 271(1)(c) without specifying the limb is vague and ambiguous, accordingly, penalty proceedings not sustainable.
ITAT Delhi held that the income from technical handling services received from ‘International Airlines Technical Pool (IATP) members is not taxable in India as it is covered under Article 8(2) r.w. Article 8(1) of India-France DTAA.
The assessee is a wholly owned subsidiary of GBT III BV, Netherlands and is engaged in the business of arranging travel for domestic customers within and outside India by facilitating services entailing booking of air tickets, accommodation, cab, conference rooms, catering services, management of corporate events, public relation services etc.
ITAT Ahmedabad rules deduction under Section 54 of the Income Tax Act not allowable in current year. Orders reexamination for Previous A.Y. Details here.
Read the full text of ITAT Ahmedabad’s order deleting the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) for Dineshkumar Kanjibhai Patel-HUF as no concealment of particulars or inaccurate income filing found.
ITAT Jaipur held that addition towards short term capital loss treating it as bogus unsustainable as transaction of purchase and sale of shares done through banking channel and STT duly paid thereon.
Explore the ITAT Delhi’s ruling in the Sheetal Mehra vs ITO case, where an inconsistent application of penalty led to its deletion.
Read about the ITAT Mumbai ruling in DCIT Vs Knight Riders Sports Pvt Ltd, where penalty is cancelled due to deleted additions in quantum appeal.
Read the full text of the ITAT Chennai order in the case of Edward Sam Vs ITO. Penalty provisions u/s 271(1)(c) are analyzed in light of quantum additions made using peak credit theory
Delhi ITAT removes penalty on Riyasat Palaces Limited in tax dispute with ACIT, redefining interpretation of inaccurate particulars.
