Section 271AAC of the Income Tax Act pertains to the penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income. It imposes a penalty on taxpayers who have deliberately under-reported or misreported their income to evade tax liabilities. The section specifies the amount of penalty and provides guidelines on the imposition and calculation of the penalty. Understanding Section 271AAC is crucial for taxpayers to accurately report their income and comply with tax regulations to avoid penalties and legal consequences. This description provides an overview of Section 271AAC and its implications for under-reporting and misreporting of income under the Income Tax Act.
Income Tax : This guide explains when penalties can be imposed under various provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It also outlines the appli...
Income Tax : Understand the consequences of an adverse income tax order, including high tax rates, penalties, interest, and steps to appeal or ...
Income Tax : It is proposed to amend the sections 271AAB, 271AAC and 271AAD by enabling the Commissioner (Appeals) to levy penalty under these ...
Income Tax : Understand the penalty provisions of Section 271AAC of the Income Tax Act. Learn about the consequences of income determined under...
Income Tax : Explore amendments to section 253 of Income-tax Act, adjusting time limits for filing appeals to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal...
Income Tax : The Tribunal ruled that an Investigation Wing report alone cannot justify an addition under Section 68 without independent verific...
Income Tax : The ITAT Delhi held that an omnibus satisfaction note without identifying year-wise incriminating material or its relevance to the...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that Section 69A could not be invoked as the director was not the owner of the unaccounted cash generated through ov...
Income Tax : The ITAT held that a penalty under Section 271AAC could not be decided independently when the underlying assessment had already be...
Income Tax : The Court held that the assessee failed to produce any written or registered document proving transfer of property to the firm. Co...
The Assessing Officer accepted multiple loan transactions but treated only one as unexplained. The tribunal held that selective rejection without consistent reasoning was unsustainable.
The Tribunal held that a penalty order issued after the death of the assessee is void ab initio. Since notices were not served on legal heirs, the penalty under section 271AAC was set aside.
The dispute concerned treatment of frequent cash deposits collected from customers for recharge services. The Tribunal affirmed that income should be estimated at 8% where records and compliance were lacking.
The issue was whether penalty can survive once the underlying addition is deleted. The Tribunal held that penalty has no legs to stand when the quantum addition no longer exists.
The issue was whether personal capital could be compared with partnership capital to infer unexplained credits. The Tribunal held the comparison flawed and upheld deletion of the Section 68 addition.
The penalty was levied solely on the basis of an alleged unexplained investment under Section 69. Since the quantum addition was fully deleted, the Tribunal ruled that the penalty automatically collapses.
It was ruled that deciding appeals based on facts of another year is a serious legal error. The matter was sent back for reconsideration on correct facts.
The issue was whether 100% of alleged bogus purchases could be disallowed despite accepted production and sales. The Tribunal held that only the embedded profit element can be taxed, not the entire purchase value.
It was held that applying Sections 69/69A read with Section 115BBE without examining penalty under Section 271AAC justified revision. The PCIT’s direction to reframe the assessment was sustained.
The issue was whether the entire amount of alleged bogus purchases could be disallowed under Section 69C. ITAT Mumbai held that in the absence of corroborative evidence, only the profit element can be taxed, restricting the addition to 6%.
