Income Tax : Explore the implications of taxation under section 115BBE, including misuse of sections 68 to 69D, consequences of high tax rates,...
Income Tax : Understand the penalties imposable in income tax search cases. Learn about the different types of penalties and their implications...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court ruling on PCIT vs. Thapar Homes Ltd. emphasizes issuing notices under Section 274 before the Income Tax Act's lim...
Income Tax : Delhi High Court held that the notice under Section 274 of the Income Tax Act should have been issued before the period of limitat...
Income Tax : In a case of Vikram Dhirani vs. DCIT, ITAT Delhi rules in favor of the assessee, deleting the penalty under section 271AAA due to ...
Income Tax : ITAT Hyderabad held that law doesn’t permit delegation of authority by PCIT to Assessing Officer (AO) for the purpose of imposit...
Income Tax : ITAT Delhi in Padam Singhee Vs DCIT ruled that penalties under section 271AAA of Income Tax Act cannot be levied without a record...
Delhi High Court ruling on PCIT vs. Thapar Homes Ltd. emphasizes issuing notices under Section 274 before the Income Tax Act’s limitation period. Full judgment analysis.
Delhi High Court held that the notice under Section 274 of the Income Tax Act should have been issued before the period of limitation as prescribed under section 275(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
In a case of Vikram Dhirani vs. DCIT, ITAT Delhi rules in favor of the assessee, deleting the penalty under section 271AAA due to the lack of opportunity to explain undisclosed income source during search proceedings.
ITAT Hyderabad held that law doesn’t permit delegation of authority by PCIT to Assessing Officer (AO) for the purpose of imposition of penalty. Accordingly, direction issued by PCIT to AO to initiate penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act is unlawful.
Explore the implications of taxation under section 115BBE, including misuse of sections 68 to 69D, consequences of high tax rates, and relevant judicial precedents.
ITAT Delhi in Padam Singhee Vs DCIT ruled that penalties under section 271AAA of Income Tax Act cannot be levied without a recorded statement
ITAT Pune held that penalty under section 271AAA of the Income Tax Act leviable as assessee failed to substantiate the source as well as the manner of the undisclosed income.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty under section 271AAA not imposable as undisclosed income admitted in the statement recorded u/s 132(4) and specifies the manner in which the income was derived.
ITAT Delhi held that penalty u/s 271AAA of the Income Tax Act is leviable when the assessee has accepted the additional/undisclosed income during the statement recorded u/s 132(4) of the Act.
Sh. Vinod Jindal Vs DCIT (ITAT Delhi) Penalty under section 271AAA of the Act was imposed based on the additions made in the assessment order, aggregating to Rs.24,54,184/-. However, while deciding assessee’s quantum appeal, the Tribunal in ITA No. 839/Del/2017, dated 30.06.2022 has deleted addition of Rs. 1 lakh made on account of unexplained cash. […]
