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...
Technicalities Cannot Defeat Substantial Justice: ITAT Allows Delayed Appeal of Rural Senior Citizen- Email Notices Ignored by 74-Year-Old HUF Kartha – ITAT Bangalore Grants Relief & Restores Matter to NFAC
Where the Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO) accepted international transactions at arm’s length without proposing any variation under Section 92CA(3), assessee did not qualify as an “eligible assessee” under Section 144C(15)(b).
The ITAT Visakhapatnam has partly allowed the appeal of Vallabhai Patel Kottapalli, an agriculturist, by restricting the tax rate on an unexplained cash deposit to 30% in-stead of 60%.
Tribunal remanded case to AO, allowing assessee to substantiate capital introduced from sale of agricultural lands with proper documents like patta, chitta, and adangal.
The ITAT Ahmedabad has set aside a CIT(A) order that deleted a Rs. 99.5 lakh cash deposit addition, citing a procedural error for not obtaining a remand report from the Assessing Officer.
The Patna ITAT holds that Section 69 applies even without books of account, but remands a case for fresh verification after the assessee provided new evidence of earlier cash payments.
The ITAT ruled that the PCIT’s revision order was invalid as the AO had already examined the assessee’s agricultural income claim, thus not acting erroneously.
ITAT Kolkata has allowed a Sikkimese proprietor to claim a tax exemption u/s 10(26AAA) despite using a wrong PAN. The tribunal cited a Supreme Court judgment.
ITAT Ahmedabad sends unexplained demonetization cash deposit case back to AO, granting assessee new chance to explain source after ex-parte order.
Delhi ITAT remands Tejasvi Bhalla’s Rs. 7 Cr income addition under Section 69 to AO, mandating verification of capital and stock balances for clarity.
