Follow Us:

section 271(1)(c)

Latest Articles


No Penalty for Voluntary Correction of Bona fide computational mistakes During Assessment 

Income Tax : The Tribunal held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed when errors are voluntarily corrected during assessment. ...

March 20, 2026 711 Views 0 comment Print

Penalties and Prosecutions Under Income tax Act, 1961

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...

October 28, 2025 532071 Views 4 comments Print

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Not Sustainable for Bona Fide 54F Claim Delayed by Builder Default: ITAT Delhi

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...

July 16, 2025 1182 Views 0 comment Print

Invalid Income-tax Section 271(1)(c) Penalty: Non-Specific Charge Legal Analysis

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...

June 7, 2025 3381 Views 0 comment Print

Penalty Proceedings Deferred must be During Quantum Appeal: Legal Framework & Judicial Insights

Income Tax : Learn how taxpayers can defer income tax penalty proceedings when quantum additions are under appeal. Understand legal grounds and...

June 6, 2025 5223 Views 0 comment Print


Latest News


Easwar Committee Recommends Non-Levy Of Penalty in certain circumstances

Income Tax : The Committee recommends that the scope of Section 273B should be suitably enlarged to provide that penalty for concealment of inc...

January 21, 2016 1162 Views 0 comment Print


Latest Judiciary


ITAT Delhi Deletes Section 271(1)(c) Penalty as Notice Lacked Specific Charge

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...

June 5, 2026 78 Views 0 comment Print

Section 68 Addition Quashed as Loans Were Repaid Through Banking Channels: ITAT Ahmedabad

Income Tax : ITAT Ahmedabad held that unsecured loan additions could not be sustained where the assessee furnished confirmations, bank statemen...

June 5, 2026 243 Views 0 comment Print

No 14A Disallowance Without Satisfaction, No Penalty on Debatable Issues

Income Tax : The Bangalore ITAT held that a disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D cannot survive without the Assessing Officer recor...

June 4, 2026 162 Views 0 comment Print

Liquor Trader Gets Relief as ITAT Reduces GP Rate to 3.13% & Deletes Separate Expense Disallowance

Income Tax : The Tribunal found no distinguishing factors between the assessee and another liquor trader whose GP rate of 3.13% had been accept...

June 1, 2026 300 Views 0 comment Print

Advance Tax Payment Not Shield from Penalty for Concealment of Capital Gains: Madras HC

Income Tax : The assessee argued that payment of advance tax demonstrated absence of concealment. The High Court held that a subsequent conscio...

May 31, 2026 444 Views 0 comment Print


Latest Notifications


Immunity under Section 270AA of Income-tax Act, 1961- CBDT Clarifies

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...

August 16, 2018 12054 Views 0 comment Print


Section 153C Assessment Quashed Due to Consolidated Satisfaction Note Error: ITAT Pune

March 25, 2026 870 Views 0 comment Print

The issue was whether a single satisfaction note for multiple years is valid under Section 153C. ITAT Pune held it invalid, ruling that separate satisfaction per year is mandatory, thereby quashing the entire assessment.

ITAT Delhi Deletes ₹4.30 Cr Addition Due to Timing Difference in Revenue Recognition

March 24, 2026 501 Views 0 comment Print

The Tribunal held that change in accounting method causing timing difference cannot lead to double taxation. Since prior period adjustment was allowed and no revenue loss occurred, the addition was deleted.

AMP adjustment of ₹4.32 Cr based on Bright Line Test was unsustainable: ITAT Delhi

March 24, 2026 519 Views 0 comment Print

Bright Line Test (BLT) could not be applied for determining the Arms Length Price (ALP) of Advertisement, Marketing, and Promotion (AMP) expenditure under the transfer pricing provisions.

No Penalty for Voluntary Correction of Bona fide computational mistakes During Assessment 

March 20, 2026 711 Views 0 comment Print

The Tribunal held that penalty under section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed when errors are voluntarily corrected during assessment. Bona fide computational mistakes without concealment do not amount to furnishing inaccurate particulars.

Penalty U/s 271(1)(c) Deleted Due to Defective Notice – No Specific Charge Mentioned

March 18, 2026 270 Views 0 comment Print

Dazzler Confectionery Company Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai) Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Deleted Due to Defective Notice – No Specific Charge Mentioned AO levied penalty of ₹44.79 lakh u/s 271(1)(c) on disallowances relating to pre-operative expenses & 35D deduction. Penalty notice u/s 274 was issued using “concealment OR furnishing inaccurate particulars” without specifying the exact charge. Assessee […]

Penalty u/s 271(1)(c) Deleted – Bona Fide Computational Errors & Voluntary Disclosure During Assessment

March 18, 2026 447 Views 0 comment Print

The Tribunal held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed where income variation arises from genuine computational mistakes. It ruled that voluntary correction during assessment indicates absence of intent to conceal income. The penalty was there-fore deleted.

Bogus Purchases – Only Profit Element Taxable @12.5% Where Sales Accepted

March 18, 2026 840 Views 0 comment Print

The Tribunal held that entire purchases cannot be disallowed when corresponding sales are accepted. It upheld restriction of addition to profit element, preventing unrealistic income computation.

Penalty Cannot Be Levied for Erroneous DTAA Claim Due to Bona Fide Interpretation of Law

March 18, 2026 306 Views 0 comment Print

The Madras High Court held that penalty under Section 271(1)(c) cannot be imposed where a DTAA claim was made based on a bona fide interpretation of law and full disclosure of income.

Penalty U/s 271DA & 271E Invalid When Original Assessment Set Aside – ITAT Deletes Penalties

March 14, 2026 684 Views 0 comment Print

The tribunal examined whether penalties could continue when the fresh assessment order did not record satisfaction for initiating them. It ruled that absence of such satisfaction makes the penalties invalid in law.

Penalty U/s 271(1)(c) Not Sustainable on Deemed Addition U/s 56(2)(vii)(b) – ITAT Chennai

March 13, 2026 624 Views 0 comment Print

The Tribunal examined whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) can arise when income is added due to the deeming provision under Section 56(2)(vii)(b). It held that a stamp duty valuation difference alone does not establish concealment, so penalty cannot be sustained

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930