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 : Detailed overview of penalties under various sections of the Income Tax Act, covering defaults in tax payment, reporting, document...
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 issue was whether income from hybrid seed production on leased land qualifies as agricultural income. The Tribunal held that o...
Income Tax : The issue was whether addition can be made based on third-party investigation findings. The Tribunal held that without direct incr...
Income Tax : ITAT set aside the addition made under Section 68 due to incomplete verification of a large gift transaction. It remanded the case...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that where unaccounted purchases are found and the corresponding sales are not doubted, only the profit element ...
Income Tax : The tribunal examined whether penalties could continue when the fresh assessment order did not record satisfaction for initiating ...
Understand the consequences of an adverse income tax order, including high tax rates, penalties, interest, and steps to appeal or seek relief.
ITAT Pune held that application of cash received from unrecorded cash sales needs verification since assessee claims that it is applied for giving advance to the farmers for purchase of raw material and also for expansion of the existing showroom.
ITAT Surat held that provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act are enacted on 15.12.2016 hence taxing addition at higher rate u/s. 115BBE for prior period is not sustainable. Accordingly, AO directed to tax addition at normal rate of tax.
Assessee had received Rs. 13.36 crores by cheque/RTGS out of total cash deposit of Rs.24.35 crores in bank account of M/s R. S. Traders during demonetization period. During the survey, several documents and evidences were collected and impounded.
ITAT Ahmedabad addressed unexplained cash deposits during demonetization in Jaisinghani vs. ITO, focusing on Sec. 69A and 115BBE.
ITAT Delhi orders deletion of ₹26.35 lakh addition on cash deposits during demonetization but upholds ₹7.52 lakh addition for unreconciled purchases.
ITAT Kolkata rules on Section 271AAC penalty, clarifying tax implications for returns filed under Section 139. Read the full case summary and key takeaways.
ITAT Hyderabad held that resorting to estimation of profit in case of best judgement assessment without rejection of books of accounts is unjustifiable. Accordingly, matter set aside to the file of the lower authorities for reconsideration of the issue.
Summary of ITAT Ahmedabad’s decision in Anantrai Vithalbhai Parmar vs. CIT (Appeals) for AY 2017-18. Case remanded for reassessment, emphasizing natural justice.
ITAT Kolkata deletes ₹8.27 lakh addition under Section 69A, ruling cash deposits belonged to Seva Kendra, not the assessee. Penalty also set aside.
