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...
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.
ITAT Ahmedabad held that the amount of refund issued to the assessee will be first adjusted against the interest then, after that against the principal amount.
ITAT Delhi held that rendering cloud computing services/ Amazon Web Services (AWS Services) cannot be held to be liable to tax in India either as royalty or as Fees for Technical Services (FTS)/ Fees for Included Services (FIS).
Bombay High Court held that initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 after the expiry of 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment years without failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all the material facts unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
An examination of section 271AAB penalty when no undisclosed income is found during search actions. Discover how ITAT Nagpur ruled on this critical tax law issue.
Delhi High Court supports Valley Iron & Steel Co.’s voluntary enhancement of disallowance under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act. Detailed analysis and implications here.
ITAT Mumbai rules that penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act is not leviable on estimated additions. The decision is based on the principle established in previous judgments.
In a significant ruling, ITAT Ahmedabad relieves an assessee from penalties due to accountant’s mistake. Full review of Dharmendrakumar B Mehta Vs ITO case here.
